Just the daily small school shooting. Barely news worthy.
this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2026
208 points (98.6% liked)
News
39568 readers
1868 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Where was the school security!??????
Why can't these fuckers decide to shoot a fucking billionaire or some politician? Why is it always a school and in most cases elementary ones?
I remember Sandy Hook and it was the saddest thing you could ever imagine.
Because they're failures and failures seek easy targets.
Just another day in America. Unfortunately.
Without knowing any details of this case and the actual situation that happened - at one point in time, a civilian with a firearm opened fire at another (minor) with a firearm because there was a possible danger scenario near a school. How did the "good guy" in this scenario know exactly that this was the right call to open fire, and not just another possible "good guy with a gun"?
In this case, he was evidently correct, well done! But it could easily have become a terrible blue-on-blue scenario as well.
To me, this single "good guy with a gun" scenario does not justify the fact that firearms are so widespread that the "bad guy" easily got his own, and became more deadly as a result.
the kid shot 4 people and you don't understand why someone considered them a threat?
I agree that the good guy with a gun thing is generally a myth and usually causes more trouble than good, but in this case I don't think it was a hard judgement call...
That assumes he saw a kid with a gun and did nothing while evaluating the situation and getting a 100% confirmation that he is indeed a crazy shooter. Which could really only happen when he saw this kid started shooting other kids. Then he calmly found a location where he would not accidentally hit any bystanders and without missing, terminated the shooter. If that sounds improbable for a real life situation, that's why OP expressed his doubts.
A good guy with a gun happens all the time. You ever watch body cams?
Also do we want every random vigilante carrying and deciding who is or isn’t a threat in general? If a police officer busts in and hurts an innocent while taking this shooter down it’s already a huge enough can of worms.. if this guy did, now is he criminally liable or are we giving random citizens qualified immunity?
Also do we want every random vigilante carrying and deciding who is or isn’t a threat in general?
There's a shit ton of conservatives in this country, so the answer to that question is a massive FUCK NO. We can't even trust them to do things that benefit themselves. I have very little faith in the humans around me when I'm out in public. I don't want them playing judge, jury, and executioner.
That scene in men in black but will smith is a conservative would be a great skit.
Statistically gun owners are more likely to shoot themselves or their family than to use the gun in defense
That includes both accidental and intentional use of the gun
That is why you need a gun safe.
“Good guy with a gun” is a fallacy.
It just happened with this story. A legal gun owner took out a lunatic with a shotgun.
The "good guy with a gun" seemingly did happen here - a civilian (i.e. neither security, police nor military) shot an active shooter and stopped the drama.
But relying on "good guy with a gun" is not a meaningful security policy as it actively encourages arming civilians. In case of an imminent threat like an active shooter - which one of the armed, non-uniformed civilians are friendly, neutral or enemies? And how do they communicate their afilliation to bystanders, fellow armed citizens and security forces - in a way that could not be exploited by an active shooter himself? Employing this as a general security policy would proliferate more guns in the society and teach everyone to be vigilant of each other, thus increasing distrust. It can also attribute to shifting the blame to victims of shootings: Why didn't they arm themselves and shoot first?
In my view, reducing the amount of guns or at least the volume of fire (think 6-shooter revolvers instead of 17-round semiautomatics) would reduce the amount of gunshot victims in the time between start of an active shooting and the arrival of security forces that would then handle the situation professionally. A stressed-out amateur with a handgun is not as helpful as a professional, and can actually increase to the drama due to increasing uncertainty in identification of friend or foe.
Didn’t read the articles, did you.
So the one guy that got thrown clear of the car, uninjured, in a rollover accident where he didn’t use a seatbelt means nobod should wear a seatbelt in a car accident?
What are you even trying to say? Use your words. Seatbelts are not like guns. What an idiotic comparison.
Read it was a special needs class that was attacked; teacher tried to stop the shooter by placing herself between the kids and the shooter and seize the gun.
Unfortunately the shooter's name has been revealed. Infamy is what these nihilists want.
There is nothing we could do, says someone who hasn't tried anything.
Wow for once there actually was a "good guy with a gun". Probably not a great strategy anyway, because the death toll is too high still.
Very fucking sad case. 16 year old shooter and he picks an elementary school of all things? Fuck.
16-year-old shooter is pretty common for elementary school shootings
My best friend's niece was injured in a mass shooting at her elementary school. The shooter was 18
It's honestly a bit hard for me to feel sad about the shootings any more. There are so many. This was like the 150th school shooting this year alone
It's simply part of American life
By the time officers arrived on scene, the suspected assailant had been shot and killed inside the school building. It is unclear who shot the suspect.
I suppose if you work in an elementary school these days, you know the Calvary isn't coming in and you're on your own. My guess is a teacher took down the shooter.
It was a bystander that followed the shooter in. Person saved a lot of lives.
A very common mixup, but I think you mean cavalry. Calvary has a very different meaning.
Both are equally useless to the dead kids.
Yes, that is a correct statement.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
For context, Bend is a small city in eastern oregon.
Portland, Salem (the capital) and Eugene (2nd biggest city) are all in the williamette valley in the west. The eastern 2/3rds is mostly high alpine desert and very sparsely populated.
Bend is small, but the largest settlement in the east, and fairly wealthy. Eastern OR is basically Idaho, culturally, but Bend is ritzier and richer than the rest of East OR.
Bend is in central Oregon
Oregon is divided into East and West by the Cascades. Bend is east of the Cascades.
view more: next ›