Yet another school shooting.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

He did warn everyone.

According to a joint statement from FBI Atlanta and the Jackson County Sheriff’s Office, today's 14-year-old shooter was questioned by law enforcement last year, when he was 13, regarding “several anonymous tips about online threats to commit a school shooting at an unidentified…

— Kaitlan Collins (@kaitlancollins) September 5, 2024

What the quoted snippet omits is that the joint statement concluded by pointing out the subsequent investigation found no probable cause to file any charges on the local, state, or federal level.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I have less sympathy, FAR less. It isn't about identifying your kid as a mass shooter, it is about letting a 14 year old kid gain access to a weapon capable of killing 4 people and injuring 30 more, and could have been worse if not for a school resource officer who had the balls 400 cops in Uvalde did not.

If a kid comes to my house, drinks a bottle of vodka, and kills 3 classmates driving home drunk guess who is going to jail? Me. Hell, I was at a labor day BBQ one street over sunday and my daughter came and told me the 13 year old whos parents party it was and his friends were in my pool. Since we were at the party no one was at my house. If one of those kids drowns guess who is fucked? I am.

With the exhausting number of shooting we have had why can't we hold people similarly accountable?

Wouldn't the better comparison be if the kid drank the bottle of vodka in their parents' house unbeknownst to them and then left the house to drive drunk? We don't hold the parents accountable in that scenario especially if the kid has never shown the parents any signs of consuming alcohol. I don't think I am responsible for a kid coming over to my house, stealing and consuming my alcohol without me knowing and driving drunk. I am sure most of us don't have our liquor locked up to prevent such a possibility because we are sure our children know better than to do such a thing. As others have mentioned, a lot of people don't have their guns locked up because their children have been trained (terrified?) into not touching the weapons or the liquor.

We now know that the kid was questioned about anonymous online threats of a school shooting. Dad said while there are hunting guns in the house and that the he kid does not unsupervised access to them. The kid said he did not make the threats. The authorities had no probable cause to make an arrest. I am working on the assumption that Dad is telling the truth. If that assumption is true, if the kid did not get the weapon from the parent's house where it was left unsecured but obtained it through some other means that we can reasonably believe have nothing to do with the parents, what are you holding the parents accountable for?

This is not to say that the parents did not play a role in the shooting. I know there is a real possibility that the kid made those threats and his dad lied so his son did not get arrested. Maybe his parents handed him the gun to go and shoot up the school. I am sure all that will come out in the future if that is the case. I get the urge to hold the parents accountable for this as we already hold them accountable for a lot of things including some things that I would also sympathize with them on. I also acknowledge that there may be another adult or adults besides the parents that need to be held accountable for providing the weapon to the kid. All I am saying is even with the kid being questioned last year for threatening to shoot up a school, no one, the parents or anyone else in authority, seems to have believed that he would shoot up the school right up until one of the student saw the gun when he tried to re-enter the classroom. I get blaming them for not having a son that would be incapable of doing this. I am not sure why they are accountable because their son proved beyond a shadow of a doubt he was capable of such depravity.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Just caught a detail about that FBI statement that I missed until a couple minutes ago.

If you read the whole thing, the statement mentions FBI notifying local authorities, and talks about the Jackson County SO. And mentions that local schools were advised to monitor the student (even after no probably cause was found).

The shooting today was in Barrow County.

Did the advisory for monitoring follow the student when (apparently) he moved? (Granted, there's a limited possibility that he lived in Jackson but attended in Barrow last year, but that's at least statistically improbable)

[Ksyrup]

This kid's aunt went on social media to complain and make some vague threats about him being charged as an adult.

Not hard to see how this kid got like he is. Also his name is Colt? As in 45?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

What the quoted snippet omits is that the joint statement concluded by pointing out the subsequent investigation found no probable cause to file any charges on the local, state, or federal level.

He either said those and the police were outsmarted by a 13 year old or it wasn't him. We will probably learn more soon although I'm surprised the FBI announced it so fast. They usually wait to dump embarrassing shit a few days later.

[GrantDawg]

"Did the advisory for monitoring follow the student when (apparently) he moved? (Granted, there's a limited possibility that he lived in Jackson but attended in Barrow last year, but that's at least statistically improbable)"
Good question. We know he lives in Barrow County now, so did they recently move? Or was he giving threats to schools he didn't go to? They did say someone called in a threat to the school right before the shooting that said someone was going to shoot up that school and five others. Possibly (even probably) was him thar made that call.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[GrantDawg]

"He either said those and the police were outsmarted by a 13 year old or it wasn't him. We will probably learn more soon although I'm surprised the FBI announced it so fast. They usually wait to dump embarrassing shit a few days later."
As Jon quoted later, the FBI didn't do the investigation. They traced some threats and turned it over to local police to investigate. It really makes you wonder how many of those threats are made nationally across the country? How aggressive can they and do they investigate those threats?

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

"He either said those and the police were outsmarted by a 13 year old or it wasn't him. We will probably learn more soon although I'm surprised the FBI announced it so fast. They usually wait to dump embarrassing shit a few days later."
As Jon quoted later, the FBI didn't do the investigation. They traced some threats and turned it over to local police to investigate. It really makes you wonder how many of those threats are made nationally across the country? How aggressive can they and do they investigate those threats?

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

If the FBI turns it over to the local police I guess the question would be how many happen locally? I’d guess very few so they should be throughly investigated by the local departments in that case.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

This kid's aunt went on social media to complain and make some vague threats about him being charged as an adult.

Not hard to see how this kid got like he is. Also his name is Colt? As in 45?

The FB messages below

Apalachee High School shooting suspect Colt Gray's furious family issues chilling threat after the 14-year-old is charged as an adult | Daily Mail Online

I took it more as a false bravado. And I wouldn't be surprised if she was under the influence of something.

I expect an apology in a day or two. If not, then yeah, she's a piece of trash.

I'm surprised that DM doesn't have a pic of the killer and family, and some background info already. They're usually pretty good at that.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by dubb93

If the FBI turns it over to the local police I guess the question would be how many happen locally? I’d guess very few so they should be throughly investigated by the local departments in that case.

Probably would surprise you. According this, and the reports is from 10 years ago, it is pretty common and 9 out of 10 reports are found to be unfounded.



Threat Assessment: School Threats, Social Media, Texting and Rumors - School SecuritySchool Security

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I'm surprised that DM doesn't have a pic of the killer and family, and some background info already. They're usually pretty good at that.

I stumbled across some info this morning, including family pics. On one hand, the site doesn't look especially reputable, but on the other, the vast majority of the info in this particular article seems to come straight from the mother's LinkedIn, police reports, and public FB posts from family members, so it certainly doesn't appear that the site is just making stuff up for this piece. More than anything, this looks like simply a case of someone doing what DailyMail normally does, but beating them to the punch.



Short version: Colt's mom appears to have been a fairly educated person with a decent career progression, but who was in an abusive marriage and fell into meth addiction and much of that which comes with it. According to the article, she was arrested for theft/trafficking/possession last year.



Who is Marcee Gray? Inside the Tragic Life of Apalachee High School Shooter Colt Gray's Mother - GhanaCelebrities.Com

[Swaggs]

I have worked with folks in the past and one of the hardest/weirdest aspects is knowing that someone is at risk (for something - suicide, violence, breaking laws, substance abuse, etc.) and not really being able to prevent it from happening.

I have definitely worked with people that I believed and feared could do bad things, but if they haven't done them yet, what do you do beyond treating them for their presenting problems? You can't imprison people for things they haven't done before. That was the premise of the Tom Cruise movie "Minority Report," which I didn't think much of at the time, but I think about quite often nowadays when you see things like this.

[miami_fan]

I think that site is another example of AI at work.

We had a teen die in a car accident the Friday before Thanksgiving break last year. Within an hour of the accident, there were 20+ articles that all had similar wording that were obviously pulled from public records and other parts of the web but had very little reporting on the accident itself other than what had been posted online.

I'm not saying the information in this article is not true. More a commentary on how reputable the site might be.

Google the "author's" name to get an idea of what I mean.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I don't think I am responsible for a kid coming over to my house, stealing and consuming my alcohol without me knowing and driving drunk. I am sure most of us don't have our liquor locked up to prevent such a possibility because we are sure our children know .

You sure about that?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by dubb93

If the FBI turns it over to the local police I guess the question would be how many happen locally? I’d guess very few so they should be throughly investigated by the local departments in that case.

Based just on the number of times I see local agencies social media reference "we're aware of a threat and are investigating/have investigated" I'd say they get at least a half dozen a year directly.

I actually figure if that's what we hear about, the real number is probably double that at least.

A key point though would be "threat" vs "credible threat".

[cuervo72]

From watching all my wife's murder shows, I gather there are a lot of things that are brought to the attention of police that they can't be bothered with investigating.

(Sometimes they will be pushed into it if there's a particularly pesky citizen asking for it. Sometimes even then they basically say "fuck off, we'll do what we want.")

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Based just on the number of times I see local agencies social media reference "we're aware of a threat and are investigating/have investigated" I'd say they get at least a half dozen a year directly.

I actually figure if that's what we hear about, the real number is probably double that at least.

A key point though would be "threat" vs "credible threat".

This. Our gun laws make it legal to be a threat, so police can't do much of anything until that escalates to a point where a crime is nearly in process.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

This. Our gun laws make it legal to be a threat, so police can't do much of anything until that escalates to a point where a crime is nearly in process.

The trigger squeeze is the exact moment at which a "good guy with a gun" becomes a LE-actionable "bad guy with a gun." Just as the founding fathers intended.

[JonInMiddleGA]

fwiw, the sheriff referenced in the FBI release is considered to be one of the best in the state. She was the 2023 Georgia Sheriff of the Year (as selected by her peers) and is a 32 yr law enforcement veteran that's known, among other things, for her work in safeguarding children.

Might very well be the least likely department in the state to just blow off a threat of this sort.

[PilotMan]

Far too many guns. Far too many with access to guns. We're going to destabilize our country, just as we've done to Mexico and some of the Caribbean. All in the name of freedom.

[GrantDawg]

Just to be clear. there is no law in Georgia against a minor possessing a rifle. They can't purchase a rifle until 18 or carry a handgun except under certain conditions, but they can carry a rifle one anywhere it is legal to carry a firearm. Georgia requires no permit to carry firearms, even concealed. Teachers can carry guns legally by state law, though only three districts have allowed it so far. More, there is no safe storage laws in Georgia. You are not required to store a rifle safely away from children by state law, though there might be some local laws.

Last year there was a big push to get storage laws and a "red flag" law passed, but the gun lobby blocked them. They also tried to just simply remove the tax on gun locks and gun safes, but even that was too far for the gun lobby. They even blocked legislation to encourage (not force, just encourage) gun safety training by gun owners. The gun lobby fights even the least little bit of a rule to ask a gun owner to act responsibly.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

The gun lobby

And a hell of a lot of us voters are right there with them. Across the significant majority of the state's area too.

My point being simply that making it sound like "the gun lobby" is some nefarious industry force, instead of being representative of an enormous swath of the state, is misleading at best.

[cuervo72]

The impression then generally comes off as a significant majority of the state being cool with "a few eggs will be broken."

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by dubb93

If the FBI turns it over to the local police I guess the question would be how many happen locally? I’d guess very few so they should be throughly investigated by the local departments in that case.

The kid committed a crime. A pretty serious crime too. The FBI could have done something as well as the local police. They didn't take it seriously and the kid went on to shoot up a school.

Another bang up job by the boys in blue.

[RainMaker]

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

The impression then generally comes off as a significant majority of the state being cool with "a few eggs will be broken."

The benefit - an unassailable right - is worth the risk to a great many of us, without a doubt.

The problem isn't guns, the problem is people.

[sovereignstar v2]

Gun owners should be on the hook for the liabilities they cause. Tax them, require more insurance, do something.

[Ben E Lou]

Based on polling I've seen, I suspect that cuervo misread a carefully worded post by Jon there. I *think* a majority of Georgia's citizens are in support of some of the items GrantDawg mentioned, but at the same time "an enormous swath of the state" and "a significant majority of the state's area" (i.e. pretty much anywhere further than 50ish miles from downtown Atlanta besides maybe the SW GA rural counties and some small sections of Columbus, Macon, and Savannah) would definitely agree with Jon. It's likely the gun lobby pushing the politicians more the majority of citizens, though.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

at the same time "an enormous swath of the state" and "a significant majority of the state's area" (i.e. pretty much anywhere further than 50ish miles from downtown Atlanta besides maybe the SW GA rural counties and some small sections of Columbus, Macon, and Savannah) would definitely agree with Jon.

That was not accidental by any means, it was exactly the distinction I was trying to make.

Thankfully, the 5 ITP counties don't run this state.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

The problem isn't guns, the problem is people.

Weird. Every other developed nation has “people” yet mass shootings don’t happen there. I’m sure it’s just a coincidence.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by sovereignstar v2

Gun owners should be on the hook for the liabilities they cause. Tax them, require more insurance, do something.

I have to ask...should we do the same thing for people who own cars and have alcohol in their houses? Because they *could* drink and drive (even if they've never done it before), should we tax them at a higher rate or require them to have elevated insurance coverage in the event that they ever do?

(Fair disclosure: I'm a gun owner and a shooting enthusiast. But I'm also to the left of Jon on gun issues. I suspect he and I would disagree on what would constitute "reasonable restrictions" -- by which I would mean "some common sense stuff" and he would mean "none". I think that where you land on some of those issues has a lot to do with where you grew up -- i.e., how rural -- and what guns were used for in your daily life. When I had a farm and chickens, I didn't spend much time thinking about my guns in terms of home defense, but they were essential tools for chicken defense. I'd rather go after a coyote with a rifle than with an axe.*)

* not that you have to do either. They always blow themselves up with TNT eventually.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Drake

I have to ask...should we do the same thing for people who own cars and have alcohol in their houses? Because they *could* drink and drive (even if they've never done it before), should we tax them at a higher rate or require them to have elevated insurance coverage in the event that they ever do?

(Fair disclosure: I'm a gun owner and a shooting enthusiast. But I'm also to the left of Jon on gun issues. I suspect he and I would disagree on what would constitute "reasonable restrictions" -- by which I would mean "some common sense stuff" and he would mean "none". I think that where you land on some of those issues has a lot to do with where you grew up -- i.e., how rural -- and what guns were used for in your daily life. When I had a farm and chickens, I didn't spend much time thinking about my guns in terms of home defense, but they were essential tools for chicken defense. I'd rather go after a coyote with a rifle than with an axe.*)

* not that you have to do either. They always blow themselves up with TNT eventually.

If guns were as regulated as cars that would be a start.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Drake

(Fair disclosure: I'm a gun owner and a shooting enthusiast. But I'm also to the left of Jon on gun issues. I suspect he and I would disagree on what would constitute "reasonable restrictions" -- by which I would mean "some common sense stuff" and he would mean "none". I think that where you land on some of those issues has a lot to do with where you grew up

I'm the same as you. No doubt in my mind more can be done for gun control that I'd consider common sense.

I have to ask...should we do the same thing for people who own cars and have alcohol in their houses? Because they *could* drink and drive (even if they've never done it before), should we tax them at a higher rate or require them to have elevated insurance coverage in the event that they ever do?

Personally, don't think taxing or elevated insurance will work. But I do believe gun owners should be liable if they were irresponsible with their weapons and it was used in a crime.

We don't know yet but if the kid stole the AR because it was not secured, there is liability. If the father let the 14 year old kid use the AR without supervision, there is liability.

[Edward64]

DM finally came through with a pic.

PICTURED: Georgia school shooter Colt Gray as his 'obsession' with Parkland massacre is revealed | Daily Mail Online

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

That was not accidental by any means, it was exactly the distinction I was trying to make.

There was never a shred of doubt in my mind about that part.

[thesloppy]

I mean, even if you think gun control is entirely useless and want to attribute every single instance of homicide with a firearm to mental health availability or access, the same exact political party blocking any shred of gun control is entirely committed to actively blocking every bit of that too.


Whatever you or I have convinced ourselves is the cause of gun violence, voting Republican makes it worse.

[Honolulu_Blue]

There was interesting local story a few weeks ago about the parents of a kid who was killed in a car accident while riding with a friend, wanting the prosecutor to go after the driver's mother for criminal liability for the death of their son.

In this case, the driver was 17 years old and his friend was in the passenger seat. The 17 year old was speeding, driving at 105 mph on a residential street when he lost control, crashed the car, killing the passenger. The driver was charged with second degree murder, but the victim's parents want charges brought against the driver's mother as well.

There is a ton of evidence that the driver's mother knew her son was an incredibly unsafe driver:

• The mom had an safety app on the kid's phone that could track how fast he was driving. One time, when he was doing a 140 mph, his mom texted "Slow the fuck down!" She also texted that" "I have screen shots of you ... doing 123 mph ... It scares me to my bone."
  
• In July and August 2023, he hit speeds of 127 mph, 143 mph, 102 mph, 150 mph and 155 mph — all on separate days. Photos of his speedometer tracking these speeds were found on his cellphone.
  
• In the two weeks before the fatal crash, the app recorded 94 trips by the driver, nearly half of them over 90 mph. The highest speed recorded was on Nov. 1, when he drove 153 mph for 20 miles.
  
• His mom, also, texted "I have screenshots of you doing 90 mph in the middle of the night when I didn't even know you had left (a friend's) lake house ... And again two weeks ago going 123 mph just because." The text continued: "And your obsession (word choice intentional) with cars having upwards of 600 hp — It's not healthy. It's not safe. And it scares me to my bone."

Three weeks later, his mom bought the BMW and took no steps to ensure her son didn't have access to the car.

Charges have not yet been brought against the mother.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

the same exact political party blocking any shred of gun control is entirely committed to actively blocking every bit of that too.

Can't blame me on that one. I've made numerous references (whether here or broader social media) to the need for expanded mental health coverage, facilities, etc.

Granted, that's usually in the context of who I feel like needs it most and how it could have the most positive effects on society, but the support exists _on my part_ nevertheless.

[thesloppy]

I don't doubt that support exists in your head or on social media, I do doubt that you've voted for anyone that is actively trying to increase that access, because they were surely leftists....but having said that, I don't know Jack about rural Georgia, maybe there are conservative politicians out there trying to increase healthcare access, or it's on the ballot untethered to a politician.

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

The problem isn't guns, the problem is people.

Good thing guns solve that people problem.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Lathum

You sure about that?

For the scenario I described? Absolutely! See Florida Statue 768.125.

Liability for injury or damage resulting from intoxication.—A person who sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to a person of lawful drinking age shall not thereby become liable for injury or damage caused by or resulting from the intoxication of such person, except that a person who willfully and unlawfully sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to a person who is not of lawful drinking age or who knowingly serves a person habitually addicted to the use of any or all alcoholic beverages may become liable for injury or damage caused by or resulting from the intoxication of such minor or person.

The only time alcohol has been seriously been kept under lock and key in our house is when I had a friend visiting who was a recovering alcoholic. Even that was not for any liability reasons as much as it was for him being in the early stages on his road to sobriety. Other than that, I only lock up specific bottles that have a habit of mysteriously disappearing when my sisters or cousins come by for an extended visit. I don't think I have ever been in a house that had the liquor locked up. If I had an issue with one of my underage kids sneaking liquor from the bar and getting drunk, I would get rid of the bar.

[Ksyrup]

Yes, it's a people problem. And the biggest people problem is when the problem people have guns.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Can't blame me on that one. I've made numerous references (whether here or broader social media) to the need for expanded mental health coverage, facilities, etc.

Granted, that's usually in the context of who I feel like needs it most and how it could have the most positive effects on society, but the support exists _on my part_ nevertheless.

That's good, and I wish more on the Right agreed with you. But straight up, tell me how not having sales tax on gun locks and gun safes infringes your right? How does the state encouraging not requiring gun safety classes infringe on your rights? I won't even go into securing guns from children, which isn't just a common sense law, but just basic human decency, but I am afraid I know your answer on that.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Drake

I have to ask...should we do the same thing for people who own cars and have alcohol in their houses? Because they *could* drink and drive (even if they've never done it before), should we tax them at a higher rate or require them to have elevated insurance coverage in the event that they ever do?

(Fair disclosure: I'm a gun owner and a shooting enthusiast. But I'm also to the left of Jon on gun issues. I suspect he and I would disagree on what would constitute "reasonable restrictions" -- by which I would mean "some common sense stuff" and he would mean "none". I think that where you land on some of those issues has a lot to do with where you grew up -- i.e., how rural -- and what guns were used for in your daily life. When I had a farm and chickens, I didn't spend much time thinking about my guns in terms of home defense, but they were essential tools for chicken defense. I'd rather go after a coyote with a rifle than with an axe.*)

* not that you have to do either. They always blow themselves up with TNT eventually.

I am not necessarily arguing for either, but how are you not paying out the nose for car insurance and taxes on your tag and your gas? You have to be tested to even get a lisicense to use your car, and there are numerous restrictions on how you operate your vehicle and how your vehicle must operate. Alcohol also has a larger than normal tax, and many laws on who, how and where it is consumed.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

For the scenario I described? Absolutely! See Florida Statue 768.125.



The only time alcohol has been seriously been kept under lock and key in our house is when I had a friend visiting who was a recovering alcoholic. Even that was not for any liability reasons as much as it was for him being in the early stages on his road to sobriety. Other than that, I only lock up specific bottles that have a habit of mysteriously disappearing when my sisters or cousins come by for an extended visit. I don't think I have ever been in a house that had the liquor locked up. If I had an issue with one of my underage kids sneaking liquor from the bar and getting drunk, I would get rid of the bar.

In Jersey you can be found liable even if you aren't home and minors consume alcohol in your home so it must be a states issue.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

For the scenario I described? Absolutely! See Florida Statue 768.125.



The only time alcohol has been seriously been kept under lock and key in our house is when I had a friend visiting who was a recovering alcoholic. Even that was not for any liability reasons as much as it was for him being in the early stages on his road to sobriety. Other than that, I only lock up specific bottles that have a habit of mysteriously disappearing when my sisters or cousins come by for an extended visit. I don't think I have ever been in a house that had the liquor locked up. If I had an issue with one of my underage kids sneaking liquor from the bar and getting drunk, I would get rid of the bar.

In Jersey you can be found liable even if you aren't home and minors consume alcohol in your home so it must be a states issue.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

I am not necessarily arguing for either, but how are you not paying out the nose for car insurance and taxes on your tag and your gas? You have to be tested to even get a lisicense to use your car, and there are numerous restrictions on how you operate your vehicle and how your vehicle must operate. Alcohol also has a larger than normal tax, and many laws on who, how and where it is consumed.

Show me the Constitutional guarantee of the _right_ to drive.

And while you're at it, show me an explicit guarantee that it "shall not be infringed".

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Yes, it's a people problem. And the biggest people problem is when the problem people have guns.

The biggest people problem is those who would abridge the overwhelmingly single most vital right of an American citizen.

[GrantDawg]

Again, not equating or even making that argument. Just stating that the two examples are definitely taxed and regulated.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Again, not equating or even making that argument. Just stating that the two examples are definitely taxed and regulated.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

One of which I steadfastly oppose the prejudicial treatment of, the other of which I wholeheartedly would welcome an overhaul of.

And neither of those are C-guaranteed.