Man trespasses at school ends up in psyciatric ward!

[pepper]

Well you don't know how the conversation went and how that information came out. At this point we only have one side of the story. He may have done nothing more than answered some questions honestly. The SRO's were conducting an "investigtion." That usually involves questioning. It seems that the SRO and AACPD went much farther than that and engaged in criminal profiling. They did it most improperly at that too. That's a forensic science. Not a diagnostic or prognosticative tool for someone who has not yet commited murder, rape or arson. You can't send a kid for a psych eval to determine if he's a potential serial killer because the SRO found out he used to wet the bed. It sounds like that is basically what they did to this guy. I can't really see where they have any specific information that would give them probable cause to believe this guy was about to commit a crime. That's what they need to get their warrant for a search and seizure. Not, better safe than sorry. That's a rule of thumb. It's not even resonable suspicion more or less probable cause. Even if this guy reminds them of Adam Lanza. That's a hunch or gut instinct and you need more than that for a warrant.

I call BS, old friend. (respectfully)

His explanation is really irrelevant, except in the way it makes him even more suspect. He'd have been better off remaining silent.

He's not a parent, teacher, aid, member of the staff or a student. He has zero business being on the property, much less sneaking into the building. Given all that, his explanation only hurts him. he was a former student and he was bullied. OK, so as an adult, why are you here? I agree we don't have all the info (we never do, it seems) but it's understandable that red flags were raised..

A few weeks ago a guy walked into a middle school with a 2X4 that had "High Powered Rifle" written on it. IMO, not smart either, but he was making a very legit point about the lack of security, even after Sandy Hook. (the school he entered was also named Sandy Hook, but in Virginia)

This guy, if he were not nuts, would have done better by saying he was testing security.

[pepper]

What the hell is wrong with people? Why do they purchase such crappy weapons? What a waste of money.

From a collectors position, an AK-47 is a must have. It's easily one of the most historically significant guns ever produced.

Not saying this guy was a collector. He probably thought "AK-47" sounds bad arse, same with "UZI".

[Saticon3]

Usually 30 days max unless there is insurance or cash to pay for it.

I wouldn't think insurance or money would come into play if the person was deemed a danger to himself or the public; otherwise, how about those folks that are charged with crimes but deemed incompetent to stand trial? Do they let them go if they don't have insurance or other means to pay?

[Wizard777]

From what I recall, three days max on soley on the Emergency Psychiatric Evaluation, but, once there on that, the docs can pretty much hold him indifinitley if they find something "wrong" with him.

No! They have to find psychological disorder or defect, he must be a danger to himself or others AND need treatment that he is unable or unwilling to consent to. If two doctors certify him, meaning they have issued certicates for involuntary hospitalization, an Involuntary Commitment AKA Sanity Hearing must be held in 10 days. He must have a lawyer representing him in an adversarial process and due process applies. Basically, if you know your name, the date, who the POTUS is and have not tried to harm yourself or others while under observation. Then you will pass that hearing with flying colors and be released.

[Wizard777]

I call BS, old friend. (respectfully)

His explanation is really irrelevant, except in the way it makes him even more suspect. He'd have been better off remaining silent.

He's not a parent, teacher, aid, member of the staff or a student. He has zero business being on the property, much less sneaking into the building. Given all that, his explanation only hurts him. he was a former student and he was bullied. OK, so as an adult, why are you here? I agree we don't have all the info (we never do, it seems) but it's understandable that red flags were raised..

A few weeks ago a guy walked into a middle school with a 2X4 that had "High Powered Rifle" written on it. IMO, not smart either, but he was making a very legit point about the lack of security, even after Sandy Hook. (the school he entered was also named Sandy Hook, but in Virginia)

This guy, if he were not nuts, would have done better by saying he was testing security.

First of all he didn't "sneek" in. He walked in right behind an employee. That employee did not challenge him at the door. He wasn't challenged until after he was in the building and walking around. Is there a No Trespassing sign conspicouly posted at that entrance? Also Trespassing on public property is a sticky wicket. That's because you generally have a right to be on public property unless it's otherwise posted. Almost every government building has no trespassing signs on it. That sign usually only applies after normal business hours. I ocassionally go to court houses and walk right past the No Trespassing sign, go through a metal detector, walk past armed guards and go into any courtroom just to watch my tax dollars at work. So if the sign says, No Trespassing. Then he can reasonably assume that only applies to after normal hours of operation. Just like all the people that walk or drive past the "No Trespassing" signs posted at public parks. Trespassing on public property is not the same concept as trespassing on private property where you may not go beyond that sign at anytime for any reason unless you are invited.

[Informed Thinker]

I wouldn't think insurance or money would come into play if the person was deemed a danger to himself or the public; otherwise, how about those folks that are charged with crimes but deemed incompetent to stand trial? Do they let them go if they don't have insurance or other means to pay?

Those folks are extended care residents of the state this guy was released. It is about cost containment and public policy. Somebody has to pay and psych services are expensive and the patient has rights unless a legal process limits them.

[Wizard777]

Those folks are extended care residents of the state this guy was released. It is about cost containment and public policy. Somebody has to pay and psych services are expensive and the patient has rights unless a legal process limits them.

What they usually do is take the person to an emergency room for an emergecy eval and certification. They give you the sales pitch that goes like this. They ask you to sign yourself into a treatment facility voluntarily. They also tell you that if you do not sign yourself in voluntarily that they will involuntarily commit you or that the officer will arrest you for something. Things will be much better for you if you sign yourself in. So there's an element of duress to this. To a certain degree you are better off signing yourself in Voluntarily. As a voluntary admission you can give 72 hours written notice of your intent to leave the treatment facility against medical advice. If you that then they have to decided if they are going to certify youto keep you there. If they do certify you that triggers the hearing within 10 days requirement.

I've read that he's in Sheppard Pratt. So I'm thinking that he went voluntary. Especially being a gun owner. Involuntary commitment can be the kiss of death to your gun rights. Usually a involutary commitment lands you in a state hospital on the state dime. But it's not impossible to end up in Sheppard Pratt on an involuntary commitment. If you have the insurance to cover it you can get a judge to okay a transfer from the state hospital to a private facility like Sheppard Pratt. Judges rarely if ever refuse a request for you or your insurance company to assume the states financial obligations.

[Wizard777]

I call BS, old friend. (respectfully)

His explanation is really irrelevant, except in the way it makes him even more suspect. He'd have been better off remaining silent.

He's not a parent, teacher, aid, member of the staff or a student. He has zero business being on the property, much less sneaking into the building. Given all that, his explanation only hurts him. he was a former student and he was bullied. OK, so as an adult, why are you here? I agree we don't have all the info (we never do, it seems) but it's understandable that red flags were raised..

A few weeks ago a guy walked into a middle school with a 2X4 that had "High Powered Rifle" written on it. IMO, not smart either, but he was making a very legit point about the lack of security, even after Sandy Hook. (the school he entered was also named Sandy Hook, but in Virginia)

This guy, if he were not nuts, would have done better by saying he was testing security.

I've been digging around and I don't think the trespassing charge will hold up.

I have seen an interveiw with an officer that reference in conjunction to this Sandy Hook and even 9/11. I kid you not. I think they are holding the wrong person for a psych eval. The officer was saying that 9/11 and Sandy Hook are the begining of a new era. BS! The US Constitution, Maryland Constitution and all federal and state laws still apply regardless of how paranoid the police are. You can't just go tossing people into insane asylums like your the KGB and good communists. Some of us are still loyal to the US Constitution Americans. I guess I'll be the next anti communist dissident to be branded INSANE.

[Informed Thinker]

I can only tell you I am highly confident the trespass will hold up the odds are high he will plea guilty to the misdemeanor unless he can articulate a legitimate reason for being there and not using the front door and reporting to the office as the directions on the door should have said.

[pepper]

First of all he didn't "sneek" in. He walked in right behind an employee. That employee did not challenge him at the door. He wasn't challenged until after he was in the building and walking around. Is there a No Trespassing sign conspicouly posted at that entrance? Also Trespassing on public property is a sticky wicket. That's because you generally have a right to be on public property unless it's otherwise posted. Almost every government building has no trespassing signs on it. That sign usually only applies after normal business hours. I ocassionally go to court houses and walk right past the No Trespassing sign, go through a metal detector, walk past armed guards and go into any courtroom just to watch my tax dollars at work. So if the sign says, No Trespassing. Then he can reasonably assume that only applies to after normal hours of operation. Just like all the people that walk or drive past the "No Trespassing" signs posted at public parks. Trespassing on public property is not the same concept as trespassing on private property where you may not go beyond that sign at anytime for any reason unless you are invited.

I get your point, but unless you want to go through a lot of hassle, I wouldn't act on it the way this moron did..



As for his getting in, the story does not reveal details, but obviously he knew he couldn't get in through the front lobby. (red flag raises on his intentions right there) And your take on it assumes the employee willingly and with awareness allowed this strange man in by the back door without question.. I doubt thats how it played out. You speculate without knowing, so I will too...

I think he noticed an employee entering through a door that wasn't locked, and followed suit. I doubt the employee held the door for him..

And yes, the public can sit in at the courts. And like you say, you can't just walk in, you have to go through security.

But thats not how it works at the schools. Without a pre-arranged appointment, you would be denied, rightfully so.. One does not simply walk into the schools unannounced, to see how their tax dollars are working.(or because you're a former student, now an adult, who was bullied, which is another red flag, since his past experiences as a child are irrelevant to the current student body)

From personal experience at Joppa View Elementary, I can tell you, they will not let you in unless you can present ID, and you actually have a child enrolled.

This is why this nut couldn't get in the front door, and he knew it. (another red flag--his actions show he understood that what he was doing was not allowed)

As a pro-gun person, I'm OK with fools like this weeding themselves out, through their stupid, irresponsible actions.

[Wizard777]

I get your point, but unless you want to go through a lot of hassle, I wouldn't act on it the way this moron did..



As for his getting in, the story does not reveal details, but obviously he knew he couldn't get in through the front lobby. (red flag raises on his intentions right there) And your take on it assumes the employee willingly and with awareness allowed this strange man in by the back door without question.. I doubt thats how it played out. You speculate without knowing, so I will too...

I think he noticed an employee entering through a door that wasn't locked, and followed suit. I doubt the employee held the door for him..

And yes, the public can sit in at the courts. And like you say, you can't just walk in, you have to go through security.

But thats not how it works at the schools. Without a pre-arranged appointment, you would be denied, rightfully so.. One does not simply walk into the schools unannounced, to see how their tax dollars are working.(or because you're a former student, now an adult, who was bullied, which is another red flag, since his past experiences as a child are irrelevant to the current student body)

From personal experience at Joppa View Elementary, I can tell you, they will not let you in unless you can present ID, and you actually have a child enrolled.

This is why this nut couldn't get in the front door, and he knew it. (another red flag--his actions show he understood that what he was doing was not allowed)

As a pro-gun person, I'm OK with fools like this weeding themselves out, through their stupid, irresponsible actions.

You should know I don't BS. But since you don't believe me. Would you believe the AACO Police?

AACOPD News

The SRO immediately went outside to search the school grounds. As he was making his way around the expansive building, he received word that an unknown adult male followed a school employee inside the building via a rear door near the school’s loading dock.

How about this?

Guns seized from man's home after he slips into North County High

As the school resource officer was investigating, Beaumont waited until a school employee entered the building through the rear door and then walked inside before the door closed, Batten said.

There is nothing to indicate that he was ever at the front door. Only that he tried one back door that was locked and then followed an employee in another back door. I'll see if I can find the article that says the employee reported him to the office. That would go against school policy. The employee is to direct him to the office. If the person or group does not comply they are to be told to leave the building immediately. If they do not comply with that they can be arrested.

I found this to be very interesting.

He and other soldiers from the unit participated in the 2008 presidential inaugural parade in Washington, D.C., according to a statement released by the Department of Defense.

So he's been cleared to be in restricted area's around the most protected person on the face of the earth. The President of the United States. But if this same person walks into a school it's 9/11 all over again. Uh huh.......

Don't act like everyone knows to go straight to the office or no one is ever found wandering around the school. Apparently this happens frequently enough for the School Board to have a policy on what to do when you find a person in the school without a pass. Guess what? It DOESN'T involve Emergency Psych Evals.

I find this to be extremely troubling if not down right malicious.

Justin Beaumont “did not make threats to school staff, he didn’t say he wanted to harm himself or hurt others,” Batten said. “His manner and his demeanor seemed odd.”

So they know that he's not a threat to himself or others more or less a danger. Yet they take him for an emergency psych eval because he "seemed odd." I don't recall the seems odd provision for emergency psych eval and involuntary hospitalization. But it does occur to me that bullies frequently have problems with people that seem odd and have this innate need to fix them and make them act right. They do this with a total disregard for any actual harm they do to the person in try to fix them and make them act right. Because it will be the end of the world if they don't or 9/11 all over again.

[Informed Thinker]

There are two things at work in this case. The first is trespass on school property and he is clearly guilty of that if per procedure the warning notification is posted on every door. It would be hard to believe that it isn't especially under the current climate. Even if scrapped off the get replaced ASAP. He was charged with a misdeamor which means he will probably get a trespass letter and unless there are more charges that will be it. If h hires a lawyer he will lose and lose his money. If he gets a court appointed lawyer they will laugh if he wants to go to court over getting a letter. The letter will be on file at the school and the SRO will have a copy of it and if he returns and violates the letter then he is in more trouble and this time based on other circumstances it will be serious.

By this time if warranted his Face Book page and any other social media sites will have been reviewed for any threatening statements etc. Other known data bases if warranted will have been checked. He could have gone willingly to the hospital as many do. Again it is not outside of the realm of possibility that he did this on purpose because of his need for assistance and not having the resources for them. He is the one who presented himself to the police under these conditions and they have protocal that they are following based on his overall behavior independent of a school threat assessment. One has to wonder who he lives with and were they contacted and any information they may have provided that suggested followup was appropriate. The press made more of this than they have a right to report on in an informed manner. The school part of it is now probably closed. The police part of it may be and the follow up is medical and confidential. Folks want to make this a guns right issue because of the times but it is a frequently occuring event usually doesn't make the press. Oh yeah a missing part of this is the two months he spent at the school and what if any incidents there might have been there. Why such a short time period why did he leave and was there any reason to believe there was a carry over from then to now. That is a missing part of this and part of his school records or staff recollection that are not public.

[pepper]

You should know I don't BS. But since you don't believe me. Would you believe the AACO Police?

AACOPD News



How about this?

Guns seized from man's home after he slips into North County High



There is nothing to indicate that he was ever at the front door. Only that he tried one back door that was locked and then followed an employee in another back door. I'll see if I can find the article that says the employee reported him to the office. That would go against school policy. The employee is to direct him to the office. If the person or group does not comply they are to be told to leave the building immediately. If they do not comply with that they can be arrested.

I found this to be very interesting.



So he's been cleared to be in restricted area's around the most protected person on the face of the earth. The President of the United States. But if this same person walks into a school it's 9/11 all over again. Uh huh.......

Don't act like everyone knows to go straight to the office or no one is ever found wandering around the school. Apparently this happens frequently enough for the School Board to have a policy on what to do when you find a person in the school without a pass. Guess what? It DOESN'T involve Emergency Psych Evals.

I find this to be extremely troubling if not down right malicious.



So they know that he's not a threat to himself or others more or less a danger. Yet they take him for an emergency psych eval because he "seemed odd." I don't recall the seems odd provision for emergency psych eval and involuntary hospitalization. But it does occur to me that bullies frequently have problems with people that seem odd and have this innate need to fix them and make them act right. They do this with a total disregard for any actual harm they do to the person in try to fix them and make them act right. Because it will be the end of the world if they don't or 9/11 all over again.

Participating in the parade means nothing. Thats hundreds (thousands) of cops, very few who have direct access to the President.

I know you don't BS. But I do know you're an accomplished voice here, and as such you're well versed in the online debate tactics.

I don't think I've seen this reported or described as "9-11 all over again". Not by the news or anyone personally offering their opinion on the matter. You made that up to bolster your point. Thats borderline BS, but it's a typical debate tactic.

True, everyone does not know elementary school policy. Thats irrelevant. If you don't know, it will be revealed to you once you try. Or maybe, if you have these sort of plans, you should look into it.

Of course, lots of what you say is correct, but my point is that only a true nut would test such things in the current climate. Should he be allowed to? Thats a completely different position.

Only a complete fool and moron would test such things.

I get it. You look at these situations as legal tests. I respect that, but I'm also considering the person that would do such a thing. This guy is not nearly as high minded as you, and was not operating on the premise you have supplied for him.

His explanation was not the thought out reasoning concerning Constitutional rights, or the ability to see tax dollars at work. Thats Wiz's speculation, where your thoughts, expressions and opinions are transferred to this guy and his motives.

Anyone that does what this guy did, Feb. 2013, is so beyond stupid that an evaluation be a doctor is legit.

[Informed Thinker]

It should be noted that multiple days after this happened. The only voices of concern seem to be coming from folks who don't know him like the forum and those who do or might know him seem to be silent or am I missing something? Perhaps those who knew him best know best. Had he attracted the police in a Mall and acted strangely would it have gotten the press coverage or was this a case of the press connecting story lines to create a headline which was then embellished in a thread title.

[Wizard777]

I can only tell you I am highly confident the trespass will hold up the odds are high he will plea guilty to the misdemeanor unless he can articulate a legitimate reason for being there and not using the front door and reporting to the office as the directions on the door should have said.

No, I don't think so. The first thing that needs to made perfectly clear. This guy did not breach Oakridge Nuclear Labs or Area 51. He walked into a public building AKA a school. As a matter of policy the School Board "encourages" people to visit schools. There is even a policy on what employees are to do when they encounter a person in school that does not have a pass. If you take away these paranoid delusions of Sandy Hook and 9/11. He was simply a person in the school without a pass. Any employee may demand identification from anyone on school property. This provides you all the information needed for one of the people authorized to deny access to send a form letter. The letter informs individuals that they are not allowed on school property. There is also a second form letter that specifically informs parents that a student is no longer allowed on school property.

As I said the concept of trespassing on public or quasi public property (malls and other businesses) is not the same as trespassing on private property. Generally for trespassing to apply to public property or quai public property you either have to be there after normal hours of operation or specifically told that you cannot come on the property. So I would venture to say that simple "No Trespassing" sign isn't sufficient notice. They would need something informing people that it's not a public area or not open to the public.

[SonOf Scribbler]

If they really mean business, they could put up this sign.

http://www.safetysign.com/images/cat...arge/F7848.png

But how many languages would it have to be in?

[Wizard777]

Participating in the parade means nothing. Thats hundreds (thousands) of cops, very few who have direct access to the President.

I know you don't BS. But I do know you're an accomplished voice here, and as such you're well versed in the online debate tactics.

I don't think I've seen this reported or described as "9-11 all over again". Not by the news or anyone personally offering their opinion on the matter. You made that up to bolster your point. Thats borderline BS, but it's a typical debate tactic.

True, everyone does not know elementary school policy. Thats irrelevant. If you don't know, it will be revealed to you once you try. Or maybe, if you have these sort of plans, you should look into it.

Of course, lots of what you say is correct, but my point is that only a true nut would test such things in the current climate. Should he be allowed to? Thats a completely different position.

Only a complete fool and moron would test such things.

I get it. You look at these situations as legal tests. I respect that, but I'm also considering the person that would do such a thing. This guy is not nearly as high minded as you, and was not operating on the premise you have supplied for him.

His explanation was not the thought out reasoning concerning Constitutional rights, or the ability to see tax dollars at work. Thats Wiz's speculation, where your thoughts, expressions and opinions are transferred to this guy and his motives.

Anyone that does what this guy did, Feb. 2013, is so beyond stupid that an evaluation be a doctor is legit.

Pepper, I will admit that 9/11 all over again is a bit of hyperbole. But absolute hysterics seems to be the general order for anything involving assault weapons. But Officer Batten did reference 9/11 in his Press Conference on this.

Trespassing at Anne Arundel School Leads to Weapons Seizure

Speaking of 9/11. After 9/11 Maryland College student Nathaniel Heatwole smuggled, planted and left box cutters and bleach on planes. It was weeks before TSA read his email to them informing them that he had done this and retrieved those items. He created an actual danger to everyone on those planes and on the ground they flew over. Was Nathaniel Heatwole taken for a Psychiatric evaluation for this? No! In fact, in that post 9/11 world with 3,363 dead, facing 10 years in prison for taking a dangerous weapon on board an aircraft. US Magistrate Susan K. Gauvey released him on his own recognizance. I just don't see any kind of a legal precedent for this obvious over reaction. The first rule of security is that you NEVER cry wolf. There is the AACO Police crying, 9/11! Terrorists! Sandy Hook! Dead kids everywhere! While simultaniously not being able to stress enough that never and at any time did this guy threaten the school, staff or students.

So they don't think a trespassing warning or even trespassing charge is sufficient protection for the school. So get an order of protection prohibiting him from coming within 500 ft. of the school property. That gives you a 500 foot buffer zone. If they catch him that zone he's under arrest. But to get that order of protection you have to go before a Magistrate. They will have to tell that Magistrate that he didn't threaten the school, staff or students. But he does have legally registered guns of the variety that we are trying to turn into a big scarey political boogie man. They would like a protective order to represent this non threatening person as being a danger to terrorize some parents in a Republican area into supporting some gun control legislation making the rounds in Annapolis. So it appears that they took this route because without being able to articulate an actual threat to a magistrate. They wouldn't even be able to get an order of protection against this guy.

In case you didn't know Anne Arundle County is a red spot in this blue state. Granted this guy might not be the sharpest knife in the drawer. But there's a bigger question. Do the police really think we're THAT damned stupid?

[Wizard777]

If they really mean business, they could put up this sign.

http://www.safetysign.com/images/cat...arge/F7848.png

But how many languages would it have to be in?

Proper notification would be a sign that says, No Trespassing By Lawful Gun Owners.

[Informed Thinker]

http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/mdcode/

§ 26-102. Trespass on the grounds of a public institution of elementary, secondary, or higher education

b) Denial of access to school grounds. -- The governing board, president, superintendent, principal, or school resource officer of any public institution of elementary, secondary, or higher education, or a person designated in writing by the board or any of these persons, may deny access to the buildings or grounds of the institution to any other person who:

(1) Is not a bona fide, currently registered student, or staff or faculty member at the institution, and who does not have lawful business to pursue at the institution;

http://www.perettillc.com/2011/10/tr...s-in-maryland/

Posted Property Trespass
A person is not allowed to enter onto property that is posted conspicuously against trespassing. That posting can come in the form of signs that are placed where they can be reasonably seen or by paint marks on trees or posts at the entrances and land adjacent to the property.

It is a defense to this type of trespass that there are not signs posted instructing people to stay off the property. It may also be a defense that any signs posted in the area are not in the proper place to be easily seen by visitors to the property.

This is why the notification is placed on the handle side of the door in plain view and other distractions not of a notification nature should not be posted there.

All the police and states attorney need to know is that the notification sign is there. With schools having SRO's you bet they will make sure as will any other security minded administrator or parent. It is an old and well established drill and process that has been supported by law enforcement and the courts.

[Wizard777]

http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/mdcode/



http://www.perettillc.com/2011/10/tr...s-in-maryland/



This is why the notification is placed on the handle side of the door in plain view and other distractions not of a notification nature should not be posted there.

All the police and states attorney need to know is that the notification sign is there. With schools having SRO's you bet they will make sure as will any other security minded administrator or parent. It is an old and well established drill and process that has been supported by law enforcement and the courts.

From what I have seen of news footage of the school. What appears to be No Tresspassing signs are on the wall and they're high up on the wall. It appears to be about 8', 10' or possibly 12' up. Also I read that the door he entered through was a loading bay door. I didn't see a sign on it or near it on the news footage.

Also to charge him with trespassing under this provision it would seem to me that there would have to be a denial of access or a presence after normal hours of operation before trespassing would apply. Hence forth the trespassing form letter that has to be sent by certified mail so they can prove the person was notified. That seems like a lot of time, trouble and expense to go to if simply passing the sign will do. If you notice in the exemptions Parent of student is not listed. So if there are no trespassing signs on the perimeter of the property. If they go beyond that sign they are trespassing.

Besides it would be too easy to put himself in the "lawful business" catagory. He was there to inquire about a job as a school security officer. He's got a military background and in security that's very good. In fact it's better than a LEO background. He did find the big gapping hole in the fort the cops missed. He was there to get copies of his school transcripts. He is a former student. Why did he go in through the loading bay door? He saw someone else go in that way and it's the only one that didn't have a No Trespassing sign on it. A reasonably prudent person knows it's illegal to go beyond a No Trespassing sign. He just needs reasonable doubt. What does the prosecution have? 9/11! Terrorists! Sandy Hook! Dead kids everywhere! He's Adam Lanza! We have got to get Adam Lanza! We need to ban assault weapons too. Uh huh.......