SPARTANTBURG, S.C. -- A Spartanburg teen was detained by police after a shooting that left two people dead and one person in critical condition, according to the Spartanburg Department of Public Safety.
Police responded to the scene of the shooting inside a home on South Irwin Avenue Extension just before midnight on Tuesday.
Dispatchers said someone called 911 claiming multiple people in the home had been shot.
As officers arrived on the scene, 14-year-old boy came out of the home and surrendered with his hands up, according to a release from police.
A Spartanburg Public Safety representative told News 4 a man, 44, and woman, 83, were pronounced dead at the scene. Another woman, 80, was taken to the Spartanburg Regional Medical in critical condition. She was shot in the face, according to the spokesperson.
The 14-year-old boy was identified as the alleged shooter and relative of the victims, police confirmed. A police representative said the boy was speaking with detectives and cooperating in the investigation.
News 4 has also learned it was the boy who called 911 to tell them about the shooting.
The coroner and detectives have withheld the names of the victims in this case until other family members are notified about what happened.
It is unclear if the 14-year-old has been charged yet, and if so, will he be charged as an adult in this case.
This news clip seems to get a little further into the story.
kungfoo said:
Obviously, the only solution here is more guns.
If only the neighbours had been armed, this might have been prevented.
Very funny. Obviously, you're being ironical. Anyone in their right mind would realize it was the 80 year old granny that should have been packing heat in her adult diapers.
Umm yeah. The Florida declining trend tracks the overall US trend from the early 90s pretty closely. (Same happened in Texas.)
Umm yeah. The introduction and the strike-down of the law in DC occur at almost the same rate of homicide/manslaughter -- the significant rise and then decline appear to happen independently.
there are too many outside factors to know what the effects of gun control or gun liberalization really are. however most people have a handgun in their home to ward off an intruder and studies have shown that people who have a loaded gun in their home are more likely to get shot or killed by their spouse in a crime of passion than they are likely to ward off an intruder breaking into their home.
If only there were more guns on the street to stop people with guns on the street there would be less people on the street to use guns. Problem solved!
Some ideas...
Tax the hell out of guns
Enormously increase punishment for gun trafficking
Have identifying marks on each bullet which can be traced back to the original purchaser
Legalize or decriminalize drugs (or at least pot)
None of these infringe in any way on the Second Amendment and yet the first three would probably have the NRA frothing at the mouth. If the Conservatives can call Health Care Reform, "Death Panels", can I call the NRA, "the Murder Lobby"?
Last point: the term "Gun Control" is so loaded and poisoned, it needs a good re-branding. I suggest "Firearm Management" or something along those lines.
Q: Are you against gun control, sir?
A: Fuck yeah! Second Amendment rulz! Go fuck yourself government!
Q: How about Firearm Management?
A: Hmmm...
Yeah, so maybe not, but i can dream right?
The really last point: I don't think Obama or the Dems are going to do anything at all about gun control for no other reason than they want to live. Under the Obama administration gun rights have actually increased but you wouldn't know it from the guns and ammunition sales. Imagine if the Obama administration actually did something! Gasp! Riots in the street. Burn this motherfucker down! Attica! Attica! If you think the far right is unhinged now, just imagine the conniption they'd throw if you did anything to curb gun violence or make it harder for people to purchase their Precious, Precious Holy Rollin' Gun H. Christ. Fuck a duck, they'll flip a lid and blow a gasket.
Max16Characters said:
Have identifying marks on each bullet which can be traced back to the original purchaser
You realize it's impossible to mark that many bullets correctly? in 2009 normal gun owners purchased 12,000,000,000 Yes that's Billion rounds of ammunition.
Max16Characters said:
Have identifying marks on each bullet which can be traced back to the original purchaser
You realize it's impossible to mark that many bullets correctly? in 2009 normal gun owners purchased 12,000,000,000 Yes that's Billion rounds of ammunition.
Max16Characters said:
Have identifying marks on each bullet which can be traced back to the original purchaser
You realize it's impossible to mark that many bullets correctly? in 2009 normal gun owners purchased 12,000,000,000 Yes that's Billion rounds of ammunition.
How exactly do you mark and keep track of all of that information?
batch marking.
And once that ammo is sold to someone? Who will be held responsible if ammo that was purchased legally somewhere ends up in the hands of someone who shoots someone? what about people who reload or make their own ammo? The technology the build a modern firearm is pre 1940's technology. There is a ton of information out there.
My point really should be this, ok lets say you mark the bullet who cares someone is still shot and probably dead so what have you accomplished? in most cases the shooter is known anyhow so really it's a feel good measure meant to make people think or feel safer but that in all actuality won't actually do a damn thing.
Kind of how making drugs illegal keeps people from doing drugs and keeps us safe.
Max16Characters said:
Have identifying marks on each bullet which can be traced back to the original purchaser
You realize it's impossible to mark that many bullets correctly? in 2009 normal gun owners purchased 12,000,000,000 Yes that's Billion rounds of ammunition ... (h)ow exactly do you mark and keep track of all of that information?
Not to mention that bullets frequently deform or fragment when they hit something, which would almost certainly obscure or obliterate any kind of markings.
Max16Characters said:
Have identifying marks on each bullet which can be traced back to the original purchaser
You realize it's impossible to mark that many bullets correctly? in 2009 normal gun owners purchased 12,000,000,000 Yes that's Billion rounds of ammunition.
How exactly do you mark and keep track of all of that information?
batch marking.
And once that ammo is sold to someone? Who will be held responsible if ammo that was purchased legally somewhere ends up in the hands of someone who shoots someone? what about people who reload or make their own ammo? The technology the build a modern firearm is pre 1940's technology. There is a ton of information out there.
My point really should be this, ok lets say you mark the bullet who cares someone is still shot and probably dead so what have you accomplished? in most cases the shooter is known anyhow so really it's a feel good measure meant to make people think or feel safer but that in all actuality won't actually do a damn thing.
Kind of how making drugs illegal keeps people from doing drugs and keeps us safe.
You asked how. Mathematically, marking them is not the problem.
Max16Characters said:
Have identifying marks on each bullet which can be traced back to the original purchaser
You realize it's impossible to mark that many bullets correctly? in 2009 normal gun owners purchased 12,000,000,000 Yes that's Billion rounds of ammunition.
How exactly do you mark and keep track of all of that information?
batch marking.
And once that ammo is sold to someone? Who will be held responsible if ammo that was purchased legally somewhere ends up in the hands of someone who shoots someone? what about people who reload or make their own ammo? The technology the build a modern firearm is pre 1940's technology. There is a ton of information out there.
My point really should be this, ok lets say you mark the bullet who cares someone is still shot and probably dead so what have you accomplished? in most cases the shooter is known anyhow so really it's a feel good measure meant to make people think or feel safer but that in all actuality won't actually do a damn thing.
Kind of how making drugs illegal keeps people from doing drugs and keeps us safe.
Well it gives you an incentive to really keep track of your bullets doesn't it? Perhaps someone is still dead, but you're probably less likely to pop a cap if the chance of being caught goes up because of marked bullets and chew on this regarding "most cases the shooter is known anyhow": They still don't know who killed Biggie and 2Pac and that's about as high profile murder as you cat get. I think you're confusing TV cops with real life ones who do the best they can, but they're overworked, underfunded and being cut left right and center in this country because tax increase is a four letter word in political discourse. Tangent, sorry.
The point is that it's at least something which is better than the nothing we're going to get because our politicians are pussy whipped by the Murder Lobby NRA. Maybe it's an ineffective or impractical tool to help deal with murder in the country, but it's something.
Finally, home-made bullets? Really? I mean, really? That's a stretch. When's the last time someone got shot with a fucking musket, man?
Do you have any concept at all of guns in the US? It's a major hobby of millions and millions of people. To be completely honest the only reason I don't have silver bullets already made is because of the cost of silver, otherwise I in fact would have several magazines worth of hollow point silver bullets made. Just for shits and giggles mind you, not because I actually fear werewolves. Not to mention a shotgun shell can be literally loaded with ANYTHING!!! I could put babies teeth in one and shoot someone with it and kill them, reloading ammunition is actually cheaper than buying new ammunition all the time.
mydogfarted
Oakland, NJ
June 2003
JAN 21, 2011 08:35 AM