Another Mass Shooting, the one in D.C.

[greg775]

Why do U.S. citizens continue to pull this s*** and take out strangers? What possessed that guy to go onto a Naval facility and kill 12 people?

He was standing and shooting from up top into a cafeteria or something with a shotgun?

What are we going to do about random violence? It's bad enough terrorists want to kill us? But we are killing our own people in a lot of cases. Why didn't this guy just kill himself if he was so angry/troubled at the U.S.? So many innocent people are getting murdered in our country.

 

And that's not to mention all the deaths of people in Chicago the past few years. WTF? I'm outraged and saddened ... again.

[EvilMonkey]

Why do U.S. citizens continue to pull this s*** and take out strangers? What possessed that guy to go onto a Naval facility and kill 12 people?

He was standing and shooting from up top into a cafeteria or something with a shotgun?

What are we going to do about random violence? It's bad enough terrorists want to kill us? But we are killing our own people in a lot of cases. Why didn't this guy just kill himself if he was so angry/troubled at the U.S.? So many innocent people are getting murdered in our country.

 

And that's not to mention all the deaths of people in Chicago the past few years. WTF? I'm outraged and saddened ... again.

Glory, fame, revenge, all could be the answer. I for one would love it if the media never ever announced the names of the people who do this s***. I am sure that many of them get off on the idea that people will be talking about them after they are gone. Take that away. Also, this guy should have never been allowed to purchase the gun he used. There are laws in place to prevent that. One of his previous arrests was a felony, which should have put him on the list of ineligible buyers. But apparently some DA somewhere never prosecuted it or plea bargained it down and he never got the felony rap. It would have also made him ineligible for security clearance he used to get onto that base. Then there is the Navy that knew he was bats*** crazy yet never reported him unfit for duty, which would have also rendered him unable to get a gun. What good are laws if they are not followed?

[Reddy]

My answers re: Gun Control having thought about this at some length.

 

1) stronger background checks

 

self explanatory

 

2) parental liability (gun owner liability)

 

When that 10 year old throws a baseball through the neighbor's window, Dad has to pay for it, but when that 10 year old shoots someone, Dad's not at fault.

 

Seems inconsistent.

 

If you put the parents at risk of legal repercussions, maybe they'll lock up their guns better.

 

3) gun safety classes

 

gun safety courses mandated in public elementary schools. Never thought I'd suggest something like that, but this is an issue that isn't going to change. Gay marriage and weed are issues the GOP will never win, and this is one liberals will never win, so you have to think about ways to work inside the system.

 

 

 

All in all, pretty easy, and a bit more viable than BAN ALL THE GUNS (but don't tell anyone how to get rid of them or how much it'll cost to do so)

Edited September 18, 2013 by Reddy

[greg775]

Good posts, A. Dog and Reddy. Something has to be done. My gawd. This is just bulls*** in our country. We have enough trouble with terrorists, who still haven't struck inside a packed sports venue yet.

[Y2HH]

My answers re: Gun Control having thought about this at some length.

 

1) stronger background checks

 

self explanatory

 

2) parental liability (gun owner liability)

 

When that 10 year old throws a baseball through the neighbor's window, Dad has to pay for it, but when that 10 year old shoots someone, Dad's not at fault.

 

Seems inconsistent.

 

If you put the parents at risk of legal repercussions, maybe they'll lock up their guns better.

 

3) gun safety classes

 

gun safety courses mandated in public elementary schools. Never thought I'd suggest something like that, but this is an issue that isn't going to change. Gay marriage and weed are issues the GOP will never win, and this is one liberals will never win, so you have to think about ways to work inside the system.

 

 

 

All in all, pretty easy, and a bit more viable than BAN ALL THE GUNS (but don't tell anyone how to get rid of them or how much it'll cost to do so)

 

Can't really agree with you on breaking a window vs going to prison because your kid shoots or kills someone. At all.

[Y2HH]

This was another guy who either 1) fell through the cracks, or 2) was ignored by everyone around him because we all love giving people an equal chance, even when they have a history of no self control. In this case it was 2, because he had a documented history of mental illness.

 

This is a guy who's heard voices in his head at times, suffered mental breakdowns, and was actively being "treated" for mental illness...and yet he was still walking the streets. We want it both ways, and this is what happens when you get it both ways. When you're hearing voices in your head that's beyond some minor mental illness, that's pretty severe, and such a person need not be wandering among citizens.

 

So if you want to know why? Because, the system/the people in that system allowed it. And now a number of people are dead or injured, because we wanted to let a loon walk among us as if he was "normal".

 

Oh, and I'm sure he was a real nice guy, and a devoutly peaceful . In this case, I believe he was called a "devout Buddhist", which means he didn't really know dick about Buddhism, and wasn't devout at all.

Edited September 18, 2013 by Y2HH

[Reddy]

Can't really agree with you on breaking a window vs going to prison because your kid shoots or kills someone. At all.

So parents should only be held responsible for their children's' minor indiscretions? Explain please. Where is the line, and why?

[Balta1701]

This was another guy who either 1) fell through the cracks, or 2) was ignored by everyone around him because we all love giving people an equal chance, even when they have a history of no self control. In this case it was 2, because he had a documented history of mental illness.

 

This is a guy who's heard voices in his head at times, suffered mental breakdowns, and was actively being "treated" for mental illness...and yet he was still walking the streets. We want it both ways, and this is what happens when you get it both ways. When you're hearing voices in your head that's beyond some minor mental illness, that's pretty severe, and such a person need not be wandering among citizens.

 

So if you want to know why? Because, the system/the people in that system allowed it. And now a number of people are dead or injured, because we wanted to let a loon walk among us as if he was "normal".

 

Oh, and I'm sure he was a real nice guy, and a devoutly peaceful . In this case, I believe he was called a "devout Buddhist", which means he didn't really know dick about Buddhism, and wasn't devout at all.

You wrote this entire post without adding the phrase "and could buy as many guns as he wanted".

[witesoxfan]

So parents should only be held responsible for their children's' minor indiscretions? Explain please. Where is the line, and why?

 

This seems off the point for a 34 year old shooter.

[EvilMonkey]

You wrote this entire post without adding the phrase "and could buy as many guns as he wanted".

because judges/police/navy didn't do what they should have done and had this man entered into the system, where the laws, already in place, would have prevented him from buying a gun as well as having security clearance. More laws wouldn't have done anything. using the ones in place could have.

[Y2HH]

You wrote this entire post without adding the phrase "and could buy as many guns as he wanted".

 

I had it in there, but removed it, since it's not true. Current laws should prevent him from being able to buy guns, however, that doesn't stop him from having access to guns anyway. If that was the case, we wouldn't have the issue we have in Chicago with gun violence right now...as I'm pretty damn sure these gangstas aren't carrying around legally purchased guns, but they're still getting their hands on them.

[Y2HH]

So parents should only be held responsible for their children's' minor indiscretions? Explain please. Where is the line, and why?

 

The line is drawn on a case by case basis.

 

There is only so much you can teach a child/teen/late teen, and if they make a mistake and break a window, that's one thing, but shooting someone and holding the parents responsible? In certain cases, perhaps the parents ARE responsible...such as a case where it's shown that the parents gave their kid a gun, and told him/her to go shoot someone. But in other cases, such as the kid is 15, joins a gang and has to shoot someone for initiation...well, not quite the same. You can even extend that to the kid breaking open a gun safe through nefarious means to get access to their parents gun, and then shooting people with it...ok, maybe we shouldn't hold the parents accountable in THAT case...but if they have a habit of leaving it out, loaded...maybe we can discuss who's 1) responsible and 2) an accessory.

[cabiness42]

Why do U.S. citizens continue to pull this s*** and take out strangers? What possessed that guy to go onto a Naval facility and kill 12 people?

 

Mental illness.

 

Aaron Alexis, Adam Lanza, James Holmes, Jared Loughner and Seung-Hui Cho are/were all mentally ill. Fixing the mental health system will go much farther in stopping these tragedies than any gun laws.

 

Of course, the pro- and anti- gun lobbies contribute far more to political campaigns than the mental health lobbies, so politicians on both sides will continue to ignore the real problem and continue to make every tragedy as much about guns as possible since that's what rakes in the cash.

 

[Texsox]

He was walking the streets because if we locked up everyone that fit his profile we would be locking up hundreds or thousands of people who would not shoot up a workplace, or commit those crimes. Hindsight is 20/20, predicting who will, and who will not, break those laws, is not.

 

 

[Jake]

I have the sense that one of these mass killings will result in the loss of rights for people with mental illnesses rather than a push to make guns harder to acquire.

 

Lots of people deserve help for mental illness that the government isn't providing them; but I'd rather err on the side of taking away too many guns than institutionalizing too many people. I have a feeling that the political consensus will end up being "institutionalize first, ask questions later"

[Texsox]

Mental illness.

 

Aaron Alexis, Adam Lanza, James Holmes, Jared Loughner and Seung-Hui Cho are/were all mentally ill. Fixing the mental health system will go much farther in stopping these tragedies than any gun laws.

 

Of course, the pro- and anti- gun lobbies contribute far more to political campaigns than the mental health lobbies, so politicians on both sides will continue to ignore the real problem and continue to make every tragedy as much about guns as possible since that's what rakes in the cash.

 

Fixing the mental health system is tricky. It shouldn't come as a surprise that many of the mentally ill do not hold down jobs, and many that do are mineal jobs without health care benefits. Also, those with health care benefits find the benefits for mental health care are negligable or non existant. So we need to fund their care somehow. There are a lot of people in this country that object to paying for other people's health care.

[cabiness42]

I have the sense that one of these mass killings will result in the loss of rights for people with mental illnesses rather than a push to make guns harder to acquire.

 

Lots of people deserve help for mental illness that the government isn't providing them; but I'd rather err on the side of taking away too many guns than institutionalizing too many people. I have a feeling that the political consensus will end up being "institutionalize first, ask questions later"

 

Most people don't need to be institutionalized long term. Most just need to be admitted somewhere to get diagnosed, get initial treatment, and then get on regular medication. It's not like we need to have a million people living in mental hospitals long term in order to help the problem.

 

[Y2HH]

He was walking the streets because if we locked up everyone that fit his profile we would be locking up hundreds or thousands of people who would not shoot up a workplace, or commit those crimes. Hindsight is 20/20, predicting who will, and who will not, break those laws, is not.

 

LOL, no.

 

I think you need to read up on this guys history of mental issues. If there are hundreds of thousands of people walking the streets hearing voices in their heads, yes, lock them the f*** up, too.

[Texsox]

LOL, no.

 

I think you need to read up on this guys history of mental issues. If there are hundreds of thousands of people walking the streets hearing voices in their heads, yes, lock them the f*** up, too.

 

LOL, No. Read my post again. I didn't write hundreds OF thousands, I wrote hundreds OR thousands.

[EvilMonkey]

He was walking the streets because if we locked up everyone that fit his profile we would be locking up hundreds or thousands of people who would not shoot up a workplace, or commit those crimes. Hindsight is 20/20, predicting who will, and who will not, break those laws, is not.

He didn't have to be locked up, but he should have been prevented from (legally) obtaining a firearm due to his mental condition. But the appropriate people failed to do their jobs and make that happen. So it was a failure of a system, not related to guns.

[Y2HH]

Read my post again. I didn't write hundreds OF thousands, I wrote hundreds OR thousands.

 

Sorry misread that, but even better...if its just a few hundred or a thousand we're talking about, I don't get the gripe. These people shouldn't be walking the streets until properly treated, if they even can be treated.

 

IE, get them the f*** off the streets.

[southsider2k5]

Most people don't need to be institutionalized long term. Most just need to be admitted somewhere to get diagnosed, get initial treatment, and then get on regular medication. It's not like we need to have a million people living in mental hospitals long term in order to help the problem.

 

And most people with guns don't need to have their guns taken away because they will never commit a gun crime. It is interesting how those two things parallel each other.

[Texsox]

He didn't have to be locked up, but he should have been prevented from (legally) obtaining a firearm due to his mental condition. But the appropriate people failed to do their jobs and make that happen. So it was a failure of a system, not related to guns.

 

Alpha, the pro gun lobby has convinced me that criminals will get guns regardless of the laws. So fixing the mental health issue would be more effective than the gun laws.

 

How many people would he have killed with a knife? Baseball bat?

[cabiness42]

I have the sense that one of these mass killings will result in the loss of rights for people with mental illnesses rather than a push to make guns harder to acquire.

 

Lots of people deserve help for mental illness that the government isn't providing them; but I'd rather err on the side of taking away too many guns than institutionalizing too many people. I have a feeling that the political consensus will end up being "institutionalize first, ask questions later"

 

So we're going to take away the rights of all Americans in order to avoid taking rights away from a small percentage of Americans?

 

Gotta love that logic.

 

[Y2HH]

LOL, No. Read my post again. I didn't write hundreds OF thousands, I wrote hundreds OR thousands.

 

And keep in mind, this wasn't an undiagnosed person here...he had a documented history of mental illness, and the treatment he was receiving was apparently "good enough". Which translates too, get him the hell out of here quick, give him advil or something, that'll fix it all.

 

I get your point if you're talking about undiagnosed people...but he wasn't.