A student at Seattle’s Ingraham High School was shot and killed in what the school district’s superintendant called called a “targeted attack.”
Classes at Ingraham High School have been canceled for Wednesday, Nov. 9. We will keep families and staff updated as this is a rapidly evolving situation.
Updates also posted on our website: https://t.co/STWGIk6wSX— Seattle Public Schools (@SeaPubSchools) November 8, 2022
A 14-year-old and a 15-year old were arrested on a city bus about an hour after the shooting and are being held in connection with the shooting.
A 15-year-old boy who police say was with him when he was arrested and had a handgun in his backpack — possibly the weapon used in the shooting — was also ordered detained.
Both boys had initial court appearances Wednesday, one day after the shooting at Ingraham High School left a student dead.
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms released this statement regarding the shooting and comments made by Seattle officials . . .
In the aftermath of Tuesday’s murder at a Seattle high school, city officials were quick to declare Seattle has a “gun problem,” but the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms says the real problem is leadership and its failed policies.
“Two years ago,” recalled CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, “school resource officers were removed from Seattle schools. Then came the council’s defunding of the police, and the loss of hundreds of officers. Even Chief Adrian Diaz acknowledged during a Tuesday press conference the department suffers from reduced manpower.
Councilwoman Lisa Herbold issued a statement in which she declared the city “has a gun problem,” and Mayor Bruce Harrell resurrected his animosity toward the state’s long-standing preemption law, that prevents local governments from adopting gun control ordinances that would likely conflict with state law. There is no evidence to suggest any local policy would have prevented Tuesday’s horrific incident that left a student dead in what may have been a “targeted attack.”
“Remember,” Gottlieb noted, “this terrible incident happened in the same city that adopted a gun and ammunition tax that was supposed to fund programs to prevent such crimes. Obviously, that failed. Seattle is headquarters to a billionaire-supported gun prohibition lobbying group whose initiatives were passed on promises of reduced gun-related crime. Those restrictive laws have also miserably failed. The number of murders in Seattle and the entire state have gone up, not down, and the gun control crowd refuses to admit their strategies have accomplished nothing, while providing false hopes to the public.
“Keep in mind,” he continued, “the suspect in the Ingraham High School shooting could not legally carry a gun. He violated existing state and federal laws by bringing a gun into the school. He fatally shot someone. How many laws does someone have to violate before Harrell, Herbold and Diaz figure out that the problem isn’t guns, it’s people who commit crimes, and it is leadership that defunds law enforcement, pursues soft-on-crime social policies and then tries to shift the blame to guns because they can’t, or won’t, punish the perpetrators?
“We commend the quick response by Seattle police officers,” Gottlieb said, “and the speedy apprehension of the suspect by Harbor Patrol officers and sheriff’s deputies, and we mourn for the student who was killed, and a family that will never be the same. But we cannot abide this blame-the-gun philosophy that distracts from actually holding people to account for crimes they commit and instead penalizes gun owners for things they didn’t do.”
Lowlife sneaky democRats use the acts of criminals to go after your Rights. Their propaganda sells to useful idiots in ca. ny. pa. nj and other democRat holes.
ditched their resource officers?
some qualified in broward are looking.
Creating conditions for the increasingly noticeable increases in violent crime while denying that policies enacted are to blame and instead attributing the rise in criminal behavior to the laws of neighboring states that have not been responsible for the crime of the state in question for decades until hairbrained policies are enacted, fail, and require a scapegoat to escape objective scrutiny……………….. golly where have I heard this before?
“…city that adopted a gun and ammunition tax that was supposed to fund programs to prevent such crimes.”
Gasp! You mean the literally billions of $$$ funneled into such an effort already over time “that was supposed to fund programs to prevent such crimes” didn’t work?
Are you stupid?
There has never been even one dollar for such programs that ever prevented crimes like this. Never, none, zilch, all the millions and billions of $$$ at state and federal and city and county levels for literally the last 50 years for such programs has never, not once, prevented such crimes. So now you wanted to funnel more money into the pit to use basically resurrected renditions of old programs that did not work before, but now you wanted to do it by taxing the exercise of a constitutional right by the law abiding. Man… stupid is all over you.
clarification: stupid meaning the “city that adopted a gun and ammunition tax that was supposed to fund programs to prevent such crimes.”
If memory serves aright it took nearly three years for 2AF to get access to the city tax returns to verify how much revenue was ACTUALLY generated by this tax. If my memory is correct instead of the millions per year that would be generated off the backs of folks buying firearms and ammunition inside the City of Seattle, the actual return was low four figures. WHY? The FFL’s that USED to operate in Seattle either closed their gun counters or moved to outside the city limit. Two can play that nought see game. And our guys did. Massively.
There is NO state in the union that will allow a fifteen year old to carry a conealed firearm about in public. So the gun laws in place restricting age for this activity FAILED. So did the laws prohibiting the general public from carrying firearms inside schools. Failed again. The Feral Some Guns are Restricted School Zone federal law did not work here. Nor will it ever. Any dirtbag already breaking multiple state and federal laws will not be prevented by some silly city ordinance hardly anyone has ever heard of. I live in this wretched state, and have my own Mother May I Card..will the benevolent City of Seattle send me a personal loveletter to imform me of the newest rediculous non-functional entrapment law telling me of some strange new law Seattle have enacted, so I might get trapped next time I drive through the wretched city on I 5? Nope Not gonna happen. The State Supreme Court finally got a gun case right.. preemption must stay.
“Councilwoman Lisa Herbold issued a statement in which she declared the city ‘has a gun problem…’ ”
No. Your city has a crime problem you are not doing anything about because you have a left and democrat problem and a lot of stupid running your city.
Seattle doesn’t have a gun problem — they have a Councilwoman Lisa Herbold problem — and a voter problem for electing her in the first place!
The whole Seattle City Council is a corrupt organization and all the members are corrupt. The change to a ward system means we can’t vote out individual members by the at-large city voters.
They have to blame someone for their policies failing. They are too arrogant and conceited to even think they may be to blame.
As for the attack, either gang violence or “disrespect”. The victim could have just as easily been stabbed or beaten to death.
baseball/cricket bats and Stanley Framing Hammers , and bare hands/feet are used to kill more often than firearms. So are edged tools.
It is never the hardware it is always the software.
If one uses the “Logic” used by the disarmament crowd, we should have the state confiscate all civilian owned vehicles as well. People do dumb things with motor vehicles and cause needless deaths. Cars are used for criminals to get too and leave from the scenes of their crimes. If the criminals can’t use cars to transport themselves to and from the locations of the crimes, or use cars to commit drive by shootings, then removing them from society should solve the problem. You can still get around or travel using government approved public transportation and vehicles driven by government approved operators.
Yes, what I just wrote sounds ridiculous. Just as ridiculous as the idea that disarming everyone will somehow keep those with criminal intent will suddenly be unable to find weapons if the law abiding responsible citizens are disarmed.
The punks used a muni bus as their getaway vehicle. Arrest the driver for complicity in the murder, and confiscate the bus. It was used as an accessory in a felony murder
THAT will solve the problem. Yeah, and I gots me a chikkin can fly to the moon and back in a week, all by herself.
It’s simple math: no guns, no legal gun owners; no legal gun owners, no innocent deaths by gunfire. Remove guns from the equation, and you no longer have a “gun problem”.
What’s that?
No, never mind the guns in the hands of gangs and criminals. They don’t live in the places where regular people live; they don’t come into places where regular people live, work, go to school, and shop.
Oh yeah, no suicides by gunfire, either.
America has gun control, try getting negro control
that’s just plain wrong colson. stop trolling.
I find it hard to comment because I have done so many times that the Left doesn’t care to listen, and we all know its them and criminals not us and guns so let’s leave it at that.
Washington has 39 counties and 281 incorporated cities for a total of 320 jurisdictions. As a lawful, responsible firearm owner, I want to know what’s expected of me as I travel through my state. State preemption is a must. Uniform traffic laws make sense and so do uniform firearm laws.
And just where did a 14 year old get the weapon? Did he get the gun at home because it was not locked up by his parents or did he buy it out on the street because we do not have a Federal Universal Background check law.
All of the above the Radical Far Right ignore with the wave of the hand.
lol
seriously dacian, you don’t see the obvious false logic of your question?
Washington State has a UBC law. It didn’t stop the kid.
The proponents of the law say “it’s common sense”. When my father moved into an assisted living facility, he gave me his shotgun. No background check was required; gifts between family members are exempt. Had I purchased it for 1 cent and no background check, we would have committed a gross misdemeanor. Both ways are a permanent change of ownership between family members. One’s a crime and the other isn’t. That’s not common sense at all.
quote———–Washington State has a UBC law. —-quote
Non-Sequitur. The Washington law is useless because we do not have a Federal Universal Background Check. Even a 5th grader could understand that.
A Federal Universal Background Check would accomplish nothing but try to turn America into a concentration camp. It would do nothing to lower crime, which everyone could do if they just enforced the THOUSANDS of laws already on the books.
A Federal Universal Background Check, nor any sort of background check state or federal, would accomplish nothing to stop crime.
For example; There is a “Federal Universal Background Check” performed thousands of times a year on civilian contractors and military members and federal employees. This is called a ‘Background Investigation’ and its applied as a suitability determination for employment and firearms use and possession and security clearance purposes. Plus this is applied on a continual and/or periodic monitoring and re-investigation basis. Its conducted by the federal government Office Of Personnel Management (OPM). It is all encompassing, it looks at everything from finances to criminal history and arrest records, to credit, to medical and mental health history, to relationships with others including neighbors and past employment, and even looks at social media accounts. Yet, annually, thousands of those subject to such commit a violent or other crime sometimes using firearms.
A person commits a crime because of their nature and/or willingness to do so. A background check or law does absolutely zero to stop a person from committing a crime.
The Washington law was useless not because we do not have a Federal Universal Background Check. It was useless because it can’t control a persons nature or willingness to commit a crime.
Any 5th grader on the playground understands this concept when they get bullied, despite all the rules and laws against bullying in school bullies still happen. Its because its their nature and/or willingness to be be bullies and all the rules and laws did nothing to stop that. dacian, if you had made it to 5th grade you would understand this too.
Apparently dacian you do not understand the concept of laws. Laws only have strength for those in society that obey the laws. This strength is also the greatest weakness of law because if one chooses to commit a crime the law can’t stop them from making that choice of their nature and/or willingness to commit a crime. It is a false illusion that law prevents crime thus protects society, it doesn’t, and the reason it doesn’t is that one can choose to not obey the law and commit a crime by their nature and/or willingness to commit a crime.
In the entire history of man kind there have been exactly zero laws that stopped crime and exactly zero laws that stopped an in-progress crime from beginning or completing.
But, there have been plenty of law abiding citizens victims of those crimes who have stopped crime cold by DGU yet the law wants to penalize these victims by strictly applying laws when the law did not do anything to prevent the crime as it was touted to do. Its the very law its self that should be put on trial and made to stop this false illusion that laws or more law will prevent and stop crime.
Laws only structure and control those willing to obey the law, and then penalize them if they do not obey the law. A ‘Federal Universal Background Check’ is not a background check, it is a law with procedures to structure and control those willing to obey the law then penalize them if the do not obey the law. It is not a crime prevention or stopping thing. In short, a law of ‘Universal Background Check’ only burdens the law abiding with a responsibility to obey a law dictating government control over their personal property, it is the government acting as a bully to get what they want from the law-abiding which is ‘compliance’ with the desires of government like that 5th grader bully does by bullying the students to get their compliance with what the bully wants.
It does not make people obey the law. I’m not sure where this delusional concept comes from that “Hey, a Universal Background Check will stop crime.”, but delusion it is. Criminals by their nature do not obey the law, a law means nothing to them.
I’ve tried to explain this to you dacian in a manner that a 5th grader can understand. But, I’m pretty sure you will not understand.
clarification: “..for employment and firearms use and possession…”
Meaning for those employed by the federal government in some manner (e.g. an employee or contractor or military). Various states also run their own versions of this for people they employ.
hey dummy, 14 year old can not buy any firearm legally, how do you get criminals to do a background check ??
universal or not ??
murder is already a crime.
more stupid from you.
“Targeted attack” = bloods versus crips versus latin kings versus La eMe versus Nuestra Familia versus Black Guerrilla Family.
I’m just not seeing a downside here. Is it me?
Quite often their aim is not that good. Frequent collateral damage occurs.
In the U.K., in London especially, they have scores of shootings every day. The media doesn’t report on it and the government doesn’t care because those scores are the gangs and criminals organizations shooting each other and its not included in stats for the U.K. . Its only when an innocent gets shot or its obviously and sensationally public does the U.K. media and government perk up. 100% of the overall gangs and criminals organizations in the U.K. are armed with firearms despite the U.K. ban, to the tune of around an estimated 100,000,000 guns under control of gangs and criminals organizations in the U.K. . There are literally mass shootings (using 3 or more victim gang gangs and criminals organizations members as the number) every day in the U.K. and the public doesn’t even know about it. Its about the same across all Europe firearms ban or not, shootings every day between gangs and criminals organizations and them controlling millions of firearms, their media and governments ignore it and its only when an innocent gets shot or its obviously and sensationally public does their media and government perk up and it doesn’t go in stats.
dacian calls this ‘civilized’ and declares this an effective firearms ban.
A few years back my wife worked on an investigative journalism piece with another independent journalists for a BBC story in the U.K. they actually went to a place in the country where the gangs and criminal organizations were having their own ‘gun show’, literally thousands of gang and crime organization people from all over Europe in attendance. They were more than happy to showcase for the camera if their faces were kept out of it and were not identified, they were proud of their gun show, even had food courts and amenities, and the government was not going to do anything about it so they did not fear anything as long as they kept it between the gangs and criminal organizations. Every gun one could want, new or old or used, the latest models, and accessories, ammo, magazines, semi-sized truck loads of guns were moving in and out freely despite a police patrol sitting down the road watching what was happening. The BBC wanted a piece that supported the UK efforts on ‘gun-control’, they got the opposite when the facts started leading to the truth. The BBC never aired the piece, my wife and the other journalist got paid.
The United States is more than tame and civilized on gun violence compared to the U.K. and the rest of Europe.
can I get that story ??
when you blame the object instead of the person who has misused the object, you then ignore the person for the object.
it’s called transference, liberal democrat anti-gun people do not like personal responsibility so they resort to this.
Comments are closed.