News

22869 readers

4204 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.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

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.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

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 or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. 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.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

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 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

269

Boy injured in Osteen church shooting lost ‘portion of his frontal lobe’ (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

51 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Samuel Moreno-Carranza, age seven, was injured after his mother fired a rifle inside church and police responded, killing her

A boy who was shot in the head at celebrity pastor Joel Osteen’s Houston megachurch on 11 February has lost “a portion of his frontal lobe” while recovering at the hospital, according to his grandmother.

In a Facebook post three days after the shooting, Walli Carranza said her seven-year-old grandson, Samuel Moreno-Carranza, “has lost a major part of what makes us who we are” after “half of his right skull [had] to be surgically removed during two surgeries done in less than 24 hours”. Samuel had endured “cardiac arrest multiple times, and no one can determine whether he has significant brain activity because his scalp tissue is too friable” to let doctors attach electroencephalogram wires to him, Carranza added in a post that doubled as a criticism of the US’s lack of meaningful gun control.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

Am I saying anything about the general population’s right to own a gun? Am I even implying anything about it? No. Nor am I equating the shooter to the “good guy with a gun”, or saying that anybody other than the cops directly had anything to do with the child being shot.

No, but the user I first replied to is by saying that "off-duty cops" are "good guys with guns"- they're not the same. Your response was seemingly backing up the parent-commenters comment, making me think that you were agreeing with them.

What I am pointing out though is that either this woman came into legal and rightful possession of a gun, or otherwise obtained it illegally, both of which are relevant to a conversation on gun control.

Agreed 100%, but again the parent commenter didn't mention anything about the woman, they mentioned the off-duty cops that they called "good guys with guns" that shot the 7-year old.

So yes, I will agree that the woman had legal possession of a gun and committed a crime with it, that IS relevant to a conversation on gun control.

However, the off-duty cops shooting the 7-year old is NOT relevant to a conversation on gun control because they are cops.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

off-duty cops shooting the 7-year old is NOT relevant to a conversation on gun control because they are cops.

Right. Because they didn't have guns and weren't shooting? Because then the victims don't exist? Because they had more Range time? Because they were trained in high-stress situations and extremely familiar with their weapons?

This all sounds like me challenging Tony Hawke to a freestyle competition.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 months ago

Because they are cops, not civilian gun owners. Again, even if there was no second amendment, I guarantee cops would still be able to carry while off-duty. I'm saying the cops who shot the kid shouldn't be wrapped with civilian gun owners because they aren't civilian gun owners.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

If the cops directly shot the child without there being the presence of a firearm near the child, then that would be a fairly different conversation. And yeah, the parent comment may have assumed the "good guy with the gun" was not a cop, but instead a citizen. However, with these being cops, and their decision to shoot spawning from a citizen with a firearm who had intent to use that firearm to harm innocent people, it is still valid for there to be a gun control debate, because if you take her gun out of the equation, there likely was not going to be a police initiated shooting in this situation.