WI - Madison, school shooting at Abundant Life Christian School 16 Dec 2024

I agree with you in theory, however I don't think there would be any practical way to enforce it.

JMO

There are a few ways they are considering in which to enforce it. At the moment, they involve determining a person's age through a couple of means (not them just ticking a box to say they are over 16). But the law won't come into effect for a year, so we will see what they come up with.

It is throwing the responsibility back on the social media companies to actually TRY to keep the children safe. (And face repercussions if they don't.)

There is a lot about it in this article.


The onus to date has been falling on the parents and the children themselves, and this law is the government making a very definitive statement and saying: We need to put the burden back on you, companies, just like we did with car manufacturers 60 years ago with seatbelts.
And now, there's so much lifesaving technology in our cars, like anti-lock brakes and airbags, that we take for granted. Back then, the car manufacturers pushed back, but now they compete on safety.
This law is really aimed at making normative change, that the onus should fall on platforms.

How will Australia's under-16 social media ban work? We asked the law's enforcer
 
There are a few ways they are considering in which to enforce it. At the moment, they involve determining a person's age through a couple of means (not them just ticking a box to say they are over 16). But the law won't come into effect for a year, so we will see what they come up with.

It is throwing the responsibility back on the social media companies to actually TRY to keep the children safe. (And face repercussions if they don't.)

There is a lot about it in this article.


The onus to date has been falling on the parents and the children themselves, and this law is the government making a very definitive statement and saying: We need to put the burden back on you, companies, just like we did with car manufacturers 60 years ago with seatbelts.
And now, there's so much lifesaving technology in our cars, like anti-lock brakes and airbags, that we take for granted. Back then, the car manufacturers pushed back, but now they compete on safety.
This law is really aimed at making normative change, that the onus should fall on platforms.

How will Australia's under-16 social media ban work? We asked the law's enforcer
This is a great article that explains it well. I hope USA will follow suit.
JMO
 
WISC. Statute. Child Access-to-Gun Prevention?
Wisconsin state laws do not require firearm owners to lock their weapons. The state does not have any laws in place that require unattended firearms to be stored a certain way. I think this is a state crime.
@Trino Okay, WI. law does not require ppl to EXPLICITLY
lock firearms or to EXPLICITLY store them in a certain way.

But per WISC. law below, there's potential criminal liability for person "recklessly storing or leaving a loaded firearm within the reach or easy access" of a person YOUNGER THAN 14, if a child accesses & discharges it, causing bodily harm or death to self or another.
Class A misdemeanor.

WISC. STATUTE re Child Access Prevention:
"948.55 Leaving or storing a loaded firearm within the reach or easy access of a child.
(1) In this section, “child” means a person who has not attained the age of 14 years.
(2) Whoever recklessly stores or leaves a loaded firearm within the reach or easy access of a child is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor if all of the following occur:
(a) A child obtains the firearm without the lawful permission of his or her parent or guardian or the person having charge of the child.
(b) The child under par. (a) discharges the firearm and the discharge causes bodily harm or death to himself, herself or another."
Wisconsin Legislature: 948.55

As Samantha was OLDER THAN 14, seems no criminal liability if someone stored loaded firearm recklessly or left it w'in reach or easy access to her.

AFAIK, LE has not publicly revealed the source of gun used in the shootings at school, but someone may later be charged under this section.

___________________________
BTW, that same section of WI. law (same ^ link) also imposes crim liability on a person recklessly storing or allowing easy access to a loaded gun, and resulting w a person younger 14 possessing or exhibiting the firearm in a public place.
So even w no bodily harm or death to self or another, it's a Class C misdemeanor.
 
There was a very interesting article recently on kids who have access to cell phones and social media. It was comparing the 'touch' rewards similar to training a dog. Kids click and like the more they get a 'reward'. I will try to find the article and post it. The Dr. basically said children should not have access to a cell phone or social media until they are at least 16 or 17 and should not have access to them while at school. Let me try to find the article.
 
found one similar to what I was watching on my local News here in Canada

Re: "No. 3: Phone-free schools" in your linked article.

My state has banned phones in schools since the 2nd half of 2023. The initial aim was to help curb bullying and distractions.
The first report has been released on its effect (so far), as per the principals and teachers.
  • 29% decrease in physical schoolyard fights.
  • Significant uptick in physical activities and club participation during breaks.
  • Big change in schoolyard behaviour, with students now more engaged in real-world interactions, like playing and chatting, rather than being glued to their screens.
 
Last edited:

A judge granted a gun violence protective order against a Carlsbad, California, man who authorities allege was communicating with the Abundant Life Christian School shooting suspect.
Paffendorf has not been charged with a crime.
The restraining order requires Paffendorf to surrender all guns, ammunition and magazines to law enforcement or "sell them to or store them with a licensed firearms dealer" within 48 hours of receipt of the order.
 
Madison police have cleared Rupnow's parents.

Madison Police Chief Shon Barnes said that the department is not looking to charge the parents of the 15-year-old in connection with Monday's shooting. “The parents are fully cooperating, we have no reason to believe that they have committed a crime at this time,
Good point. But.... please note the fine print detail. They appear to have cleared them with a caveat.
 
IMO, this is yet another case of a teenager who had a traumatic childhood, clearly couldn't form positive friendships with peers, was being desensitized and influenced by violent content on the Internet, and had a parent who thought shooting guns together was just the family-bonding-time they needed.
 
Dear Websleuths members and guests.
Let's keep those awful, obnoxious advertisements off of Websleuths.
You can help by becoming a subscriber to DNA Solves.com. Even 5 or 10 dollars a month would make a difference.
Those ads made me sick to my stomach, but they were necessary. Now, we can keep them off Websleuths.
Find out how you can become a subscriber to DNA Solves.com by CLICKING HERE.
Do not comment on this thread. CLICK HERE
to ask questions and to learn more
 
This is a great article that explains it well. I hope USA will follow suit.
JMO
Personally i'm pessimistic. Similar laws in the past have either been put off because the age verification was found to be unworkable (a 99% success rate sounds good until you consider there's a couple of million teens and tweens in Australia so that's 20,000 potential failures), or the social media companies find the laws uneconomical and geoblock the entire country (like blocking posting of news links where they're required to pay news providors, or US news sites blocking EU IPS).

IMO we need laws that reduce harm at all ages, like their algorithms that push extreme content - a radicalized young adult will be even more dangerous than a radicalized teen as they will have easier access to weapons. And who doesn't now a senior who's fallen for a scam or conspiracy theory on Facebook?
 
IMO, this is yet another case of a teenager who had a traumatic childhood, clearly couldn't form positive friendships with peers, was being desensitized and influenced by violent content on the Internet, and had a parent who thought shooting guns together was just the family-bonding-time they needed.
Most likely a good description of many kids, especially in middle school, except for the shooting guns together.
 
Parents are legally responsible for protecting their children, (and protecting society FROM their children).

Most children are going to be fine online with some guardrails, and are going to need some exposure to learn how to function in society, just like they need exposure to peanuts and dust to develop immunity.

I haven't seen anything indicating that this girl posted about anything BUT school shootings and gore. Even her music playlists were concerning.

I don't believe that her parents mistakenly thought she was into KPop or similar - They either neglected her entirely, or thought that what she was into was just fine.

I also noticed that the social media communities that she has been identified as being part of so far aren't necessarily ones that glorify racism - They mostly glorify violence. IMO, she learned the racial slurs in person.

She would have become what she became regardless of social media, just like the Columbine shooters did.
An older read but informative is A Mother's Reckoning about her Columbine son, Dylan Klebold. It's been a while since I read the book, but what I recall is the parents were very involved with their son when he was younger. I don't recall how those parent could have done things much differently. You raise a kid to a certain age, then gradually let go as they mature into high school age, and you no longer hold their hand as they cross different streets. While I don't know NR's family, I do understand many parents are shocked when they learn something nefarious their child has done.
 
Creepy site.

“The 15-year-old Wisconsin school shooter who killed two and injured six at her conservative Christian school had a dark past which appears to have included membership to a morbid site called “Watch People Die.”


“The site includes graphic and upsetting images of people getting shot to death, run over, other school shooters and many international incidents like a 19-year-old man who died after getting caught in a meat grinder”


Watch people die was a large subreddit on reddit at one point. It was shut down after video from Christchurch was posted on there.They've since moved to a different site.

Youd be surprised how many people consume this content.We probably have a few of them here on WS


They had 300k members when they were shut down

Reddit has banned two subreddits, r/Watchpeopledie and r/Gore, after they began to circulate footage of Friday's terrorist attack in New Zealand.

r/Watchpeopledie was particularly notorious for hosting real-life video clips and GIFs of people meeting their demise. The subreddit had more than 300,000 subscribers. But on Friday, both r/Watchpeopledie and r/Gore were shut down for violating Reddit's content policy against "glorifying or encouraging violence."
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
128
Guests online
536
Total visitors
664

Forum statistics

Threads
625,639
Messages
18,507,427
Members
240,827
Latest member
inspector_gadget_
Back
Top