Enough is enough. Public massacres and school shootings must stop.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: openminded2011
a reply to: Violater1This kid did everything but walk up and down the street wearing a billboard stating he was going to do this, and he was largely ignored, we should be asking our self why.

You might want to ask yourself why he was legally able to buy a gun if he was in such obvious distress. You think that could be problematic? Do you think that could be addressed with a few controls?

Because in the US a person who is adjudicated with a mental problem has that info attached to their records. If a person voluntarily sees a mental health expert and is not held against their will based on those visits the info is medical and therefore private.

People dont seem to understand that in the mental health area a person must be adjudicated with a mental problem in order to restrict or even deny their constitutional rights.

An example based on my state -
When a person is taken to a hospital for a mental health evaluation the officer / family members / person with direct knowledge of the incident fill out an affidavit. The person is examined by medical staff and then screened by psychiatric evaluation nurses. Based on that interview the Psychiatric Doctor then decides if the person will be held for 96 hours for further evaluation and assistance against there will.

If the 96 hour hold is invoked they have that much time to determine whats going on and if the person continues to present a danger to themselves or others. If the Psych doc decides to keep the person longer they must inform the patient and read them the civil equivalent of their Miranda rights (rights to a lawyer, to appear before a judge, ability to refuse medication prior to a court hearing etc etc. The medical staff then must inform the legal system for the county they are in so the court knows a person is being involuntarily detained against their will within 24 hours. At the end of the 21 days a report must be presented to the court if medical wants to keep the person beyond the 21 days. Like in criminal cases it is dependent on the accusers to justify their request to continue holding the person against their will.

The above is an example of my states laws on this topic, the procedure required and why this info would attach to the persons record. This is also only for involuntary incidents.

If a person cooperates voluntarily with medical the above procedures are not used and by extension their encounter is not attached to their record.

The key phrasing in every states laws on mental health issues is adjudicated. It is saying the person in question does not admit he has a problem even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It is that mindset that is the concerning factor. If the person does not think his actions are self destructive then what other actions would that person think are ok.

It comes down to due process rights. A person cannot be denied their constitutional rights unless a court finds the person guilty of what he is being accused of. This is also why the No Fly list is so dangerous. Your name is added to a list however you dont have access to the information that placed you on that list. Only recently have the courts forced the agencies responsible for those lists to establish a method for people to challenge their inclusion on the list. The lists are not always accurate nor are they updated in a timely manner. I gave an example a page or 2 back. Senator Ted Kennedy faced the same problem. His name was on the do not fly list and it took a while for him to challenge its inclusion. It eventually required him speaking to the people at the agency HQ to get his name removed. Normal citizens do not get that luxury of being able to call up an agency head and get their cases handled.

The push by the left to deny a person constitutional rights based on an arbitrary list with no oversight that operates outside the purview of the judicial system is not a slippery slope argument.

It is nothing but an icy cliff and a very dangerous one at that.

Given how the DOJ / FBI has abused its authority with regards to FISA the evidence is present as to why its a bad idea. Given how the IRS targeted conservative groups... How the ATFE ran guns into Mexico. All the text messages we have seen showing a personal animus / bias based on nothing more than there own personal opinions..

No law will stop a incident like this from occurring. Arbitrarily denying a person their constitutional rights with no ability for redress of grievances not only wont stop this from occurring but will most assuredly be a catalyst that creates more of these situations.

Just food for thought.

originally posted by: DaveMU
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed


(Long, long time lurker but 1st post)
I live in South Africa and we have lots of guns and gun crime here. We do not however have any School Shootings here either, lots of others but no indiscriminate shootings. We do not have the Culture here where Notoriety seems to be glorified by some elements of the Youth in the USA where shootings are aimed at pure Notoriery as opposed to crime / suicide or spousal murder.

Where I do believe in vetting and some sort of Gun Control it is reasonably difficult to get a gun legally here but certainly not impossible. It is however very easy to get one illegally. Though shootings via legal guns do take place every year the vast majority take place with illegal /unlicensed weaponry.

Australia being basically an Island albeit a huge one it is also easier to control gun flow to a higher degree than SA and certainly the USA with their Lax Border Controls.

With regard to School / Public Shootings and those shootings only it is not the guns themselves that is the problem or certainly not the only problem or else we would be having them here. It is certainly the glorification or Notoriety in the perperators mind (delusion / Mental illness) that leads to these shootings.

I can guarantee you that if School Shootings ever become a thing at our Schools, we would not hesitate to have armed guards on our premises it is just at the moment it is not a thing for us.

This country is so nuts with politicians brainwashing them it is becoming crazy.Everyone wants a solution for the school shootings.Not gonna happen over night nor banning the NRA or guns.Each school should be looking into armed guards as well as colleges and malls.No country bans guns anyways.They give their guns to government workers who are made up of We The People.Governments become far more dangerous when they do not fix problems and take all guns.There has never in the history of mankind been a mass murderer with a gun just shoot the gun and therefore people die.They must aim the gun at people for them to die.
No one ever talks about the drugs these people are taking yet in the government nor MSM.
Then you have the madness of 17 people died from gun violence,which is very sad.Mostly the liberals do not say one thing about abortions,obvious human beings growing in a woman’s stomach and their is this idea that this is a woman’s choice.
Liberals and conservatives should be able to have a tax form checking yes or no for paying for abortions.20 years ago there was guns all over the place but never gun shootings like this in schools.Look at the families becoming broken and morals decaying and morale is dying in this country.

a reply to: Violater1

[Enough is enough. Public massacres and school shootings must stop.]

No it's not enough , because we keep electing ,the same ppl who say the same exact thing after everrrrry incident like this, hearts and prayers what they always say, followed by now it's not the time, I'm so disillusioned I didn't even planned to comment..like what's the fukin point.. It's now just another Wednesday..

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: DaveMU
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed


(Long, long time lurker but 1st post)
I live in South Africa and we have lots of guns and gun crime here. We do not however have any School Shootings here either, lots of others but no indiscriminate shootings. We do not have the Culture here where Notoriety seems to be glorified by some elements of the Youth in the USA where shootings are aimed at pure Notoriery as opposed to crime / suicide or spousal murder.

Where I do believe in vetting and some sort of Gun Control it is reasonably difficult to get a gun legally here but certainly not impossible. It is however very easy to get one illegally. Though shootings via legal guns do take place every year the vast majority take place with illegal /unlicensed weaponry.

Australia being basically an Island albeit a huge one it is also easier to control gun flow to a higher degree than SA and certainly the USA with their Lax Border Controls.

With regard to School / Public Shootings and those shootings only it is not the guns themselves that is the problem or certainly not the only problem or else we would be having them here. It is certainly the glorification or Notoriety in the perperators mind (delusion / Mental illness) that leads to these shootings.

I can guarantee you that if School Shootings ever become a thing at our Schools, we would not hesitate to have armed guards on our premises it is just at the moment it is not a thing for us.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Excellent post on the topic at hand. I would only add HIPAA regulations would have to be changed in order for private, non-criminal cases of mental health records to be available for a background check. That probably will never happen, considering how HIPAA is one of our most sacred regulations.

Again, in total agreement, it's far from a slippery slope fallacy. Anyone who calls the argument against releasing mental health records as part of a background check a fallacy really needs to read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?". Slippery slopes do exist outside of fallacy. They're rare, but we are looking at an endless game of "definition" of certain types of mental illness. Definitions that no doctor would ever ascribe to and would probably be determined by bureaucrats and toted by elected officials with absolutely no business in mental health except as patients.

Further, if we make depression more socially unacceptable by legislating away the basic rights of the mentally ill, we'll have a lot more people who don't seek help. Paranoia is a common symptom of just about every metal illness. It won't help.

a reply to: MostlyReading

So banning firearms will magically make gun violence cease am I correct? That's your way of thinking?

I guess then and ONLY THEN, when a psychopath takes an automatic weapon or shotgun from the back of a parked police cruiser and shoots up a shopping center or school, will your kind FINALLY blame the individual and not the instrument.

originally posted by: OrdoAdChao
a reply to: Xcathdra

Excellent post on the topic at hand. I would only add HIPAA regulations would have to be changed in order for private, non-criminal cases of mental health records to be available for a background check. That probably will never happen, considering how HIPAA is one of our most sacred regulations.

Again, in total agreement, it's far from a slippery slope fallacy. Anyone who calls the argument against releasing mental health records as part of a background check a fallacy really needs to read "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?". Slippery slopes do exist outside of fallacy. They're rare, but we are looking at an endless game of "definition" of certain types of mental illness. Definitions that no doctor would ever ascribe to and would probably be determined by bureaucrats and toted by elected officials with absolutely no business in mental health except as patients.

Further, if we make depression more socially unacceptable by legislating away the basic rights of the mentally ill, we'll have a lot more people who don't seek help. Paranoia is a common symptom of just about every metal illness. It won't help.

HIPPA is a federal law that is defined by state laws (A rare setup). While HIPPA is a factor it does have an exception in these types of cases. If a person informs their doctor that they intend to hurt others it is lawful and required they notify law enforcement as well as the person / entity targeted.

A person who has been adjudicated with mental issues will have that info attached to their criminal history. I have never seen medical info attached in an indepth manner. It should be a notation. That way it would show up when a persons try to buy a firearm on their background check. It also pops when someone in law enforcement / PA office run a criminal history (at least that has been my experience).

a reply to: sdcigarpig

What is easier from a law enforcement to deal with, a criminal with a revolver or a handgun that is a semi auto fire weapon? One where the criminal has to re-cock every time, to fire, or one where the criminal has to just point and shoot and not have to re-cock every time? 

This makes no sense whatsoever, a revolver or semi-auto are both fire until empty. I guess you want to ban revolvers too?

And as to why civilians need military calibers, in all your knowledge of firearms you don't need me to tell you that the .223 Remington is the civilian and sporting version of the 5.56x45mm Nato round. And that while not interchangeable per se, one can be fired from the other in a pinch.

You're making yourself look like an ass.

[post]a reply to: Xcathdra

A person who has been adjudicated with mental issues will have that info attached to their criminal history. I have never seen medical info attached in an indepth manner. It should be a notation. That way it would show up when a persons try to buy a firearm on their background check. It also pops when someone in law enforcement / PA office run a criminal history (at least that has been my experience).

I am pretty sure that would the common experience everywhere, even though I am not an authority on the subject I'd say it's a safe assumption to make.

So, long story short, we have the tools in place for legally preventing someone from obtaining a firearm if they've been adjudicated with mental illness as a factor.

I've had a long history of depression and suicidal ideations. It's a legitimate familial trait. The only thing that kills one of us is ourselves. I was adopted and wasn't raised with the family that understood this, and now I'm medicated for it and I am literally a shining example of how mental health treatment can turn someone around. I've operated firearms safely and legally for as long as I can remember. I honestly don't remember the first time my dad stuck me in his lap and helped me shoot a pistol. This is the common story where I am from. Guns are a part of our culture in Montana and I don't think I've ever talked to a native Montanan about shooting/hunting who has never shot a gun. I am sure I know a few, but I don't know that about them. By the stances of some individuals here, I shouldn't even be around a gun.

As a side note, I was standing in line next to the shooter during this incident: Margaret Leary School Shooting

The reasons my classmate and friend committed that act are precisely the same as this incident. Sure, we were 4th graders and the victim was a 5th grader who was caught in the line of fire. But the social rejection, bullying and total lack of healthy family life (trailer park newkid from California with AIDS afflicted, dying heroin addicts for parents) are mirrored in this incident. The gun was not responsible for the shooting. Society's neglect of an individual was.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

39 visits by the cops to this kids home. The FBI knew about it but said they couldn't find him. Personally I think the FBI is too busy looking for whats not there than actually protecting the public.

At any rate, all the warnings, visits by cops and his desire to become a school shooter being well known leads me to believe no one is looking out for any of us. They are paid decent salaries to do nothing I guess.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: openminded2011
a reply to: Violater1This kid did everything but walk up and down the street wearing a billboard stating he was going to do this, and he was largely ignored, we should be asking our self why.

You might want to ask yourself why he was legally able to buy a gun if he was in such obvious distress. You think that could be problematic? Do you think that could be addressed with a few controls?

Because in the US a person who is adjudicated with a mental problem has that info attached to their records. If a person voluntarily sees a mental health expert and is not held against their will based on those visits the info is medical and therefore private.

Well then, best stock up on 'thoughts and prayers', and when you (especially as as a LEO) see children slaughtered in their schools, take comfort that your rights have not been impinged upon.

www.dailymail.co.uk...



they were alerted..since 2010 the cops went to the house 39 time for various things....child abuse...elder abuse
domestic disturbances etc ets..the FBI was nofified twice.....about him planning a big shooting.....

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Violater1

This was the school's fault in my opinion. This kid got expelled for making threats.

Why weren't authorities alerted before? How was he not hit with a felony. That would bar him from buying a gun.

Many of these shooters have had diagnosed mental illnesses. That should stop you from getting a gun.

a reply to: Scifi2424

As far as signs being present we need to remember one thing. When all of the incidents / warnings are taken together you see the signs. However when they happen one at a time over the year with differential individuals who dont talk to each other it is very easy to miss signs.

Trying to review the actions of the warnings in a 20/20 hindsight fashion does not work.

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

No. We won't do that. Between Pulse, Vegas and now this, we will do something. But it won't be a knee-jerk "ban the guns" or "anyone who has seen a shrink can't own guns until the shrink writes a note" reaction. Because that is a horrible idea in a country with so many legal and illegal guns AND a strata of society that may be under the care of a shrink but are not capable and willing of this kind of act. The constitution is hard to circumvent in it's most base areas. There will be no change to the 2nd.

I hope the change comes in the form of government, media and society coming together to identify individuals who openly discuss committing acts like these in public/private forum and take it seriously. You can't post certain things about certain individuals without scary, no-nonsense individuals demanding to talk to you. Allowing someone to get to this point should be sending our paranoid tribe into a frenzy. If it isn't a conspiracy, it's a complete failure of society on just about every applicable level.

a reply to: Xcathdra

These situations are entirely hindsight. We need to learn from them, and this one can yield a lot of learning. Vegas was outrageously deadly but the motives still aren't clear, and I feel that there were obvious signs and signals from that guy, but he wasn't a heavy social media user so we don't have that kind of insight. Individuals can take a lot from that situation, whereas society as a whole can only focus on the weapons used.

This situation is more like Columbine, and honestly blaming easy access to guns is a cop out. We went through centuries of zero gun control as a nation, and only within the past half a century has this become a problem. Contemporary American society is churning out chaff of our own making.

You never banned the guns,you put them into the hands of people who work for government jobs.....So if the world turns like WW2 all you will be killed from possible dictators who mass murder.

a reply to: openminded2011

I have to agree. The violence is a symptom and banning this or that object isn't the cure. But the country may never get it because it goes against the big plan.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Konduit
Which one of these is more likely to deter a criminal.

depends on how psychotic and motivated the murderer actually is

doesn't matter which reality will likely bring them down in a shot or two?

originally posted by: OrdoAdChao
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

No. We won't do that. Between Pulse, Vegas and now this, we will do something.

That starts when? Same platitudes are mouthed after every such event. And in other news...White House refuses to release photo of Trump signing bill to weaken gun law. Perhaps the shame is setting in.