Shootings

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by noxiousdog »

His mistakes compound the errors made by other law enforcement entities, including the FBI and Broward County PD.
Comments like that are why gun owners don't feel that the state can protect them.

I wonder if this is a function of our innocent until proven guilty system. As an anecdote, I have a friend who has an abusive husband. She fled the house when he pulled a gun on her daughter. He is on SSDI due to PTSD. He also has a previous domestic violence charge that expired (deferred adjudication?). He's still legally allowed to have a weapon. He also sells drugs, so the legality of the property isn't a hindrance to him. The police came out and did take him to a mental hospital. They did not confiscate the gun. Threatening to kill your own child is not a crime as it's not considered a legitimate threat, so he was released after evaluation. In fact, she was told by the womens' center that the only crime committed was her kidnapping the kids when she fled. Everyone knows the husband is dangerous. His family refused to take him in when she kicked him out (her name is on the lease, his isn't.. no she shouldn't have gone back home, but that's a longer and irrelevant story). But the state can't do anything about it until after someone gets beaten or shot.

Of course it's more likely that the friend harms herself, her kid, or an innocent that defending herself from an abusive husband. But, I think the perceived safety of owning a firearm needs to be protected as we are discussing and implementing regulation. It's great for those of us where our biggest fear is a mass shooting. Way more people have to worry about the crime maps I posted earlier.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Enough
Posts: 14688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:05 pm
Location: Serendipity
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Enough »

Handguns save lives, not people. At least that's what I thought the pro gun folks have argued for years heh.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream

“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by noxiousdog »

Enough wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:00 pm Handguns save lives, not people. At least that's what I thought the pro gun folks have argued for years heh.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Well, in that calculus is this friend isn't very smart so I wouldn't trust her with a weapon either. My girlfriend, on the other hand, got mad at me for not checking to see if the revolver was loaded when it was handed to me even after three people had already checked. :oops:
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: Shootings

Post by Smoove_B »

So in your case, is this a situation where a person with mental health issues should have been denied purchasing a gun in the first place or a scenario where we have someone that was a gun owner that is now in a questionable state of mental health and should have his gun rights re-examined?

Because I'm pretty sure the solutions to both are quite different.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by noxiousdog »

Smoove_B wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:10 pm So in your case, is this a situation where a person with mental health issues should have been denied purchasing a gun in the first place or a scenario where we have someone that was a gun owner that is now in a questionable state of mental health and should have his gun rights re-examined?

Because I'm pretty sure the solutions to both are quite different.
As of today, neither.

As of the future? Maybe we say people diagnosed with PTSD cant' have weapons. I'm ok with that assuming that's a legitimate reason. I don't know enough about PTSD.

Regardless of the legality of weapons, he would have acquired one though. Obviously he's fine distributing illegal substances. So, how do we protect the friend?
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82094
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Isgrimnur »

My father's nightmares about cleaning up a crashed cargo plane in Thailand in the 60s shouldn't preclude him from owning a firearm.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Enough
Posts: 14688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:05 pm
Location: Serendipity
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Enough »

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:07 pm
Enough wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:00 pm Handguns save lives, not people. At least that's what I thought the pro gun folks have argued for years heh.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Well, in that calculus is this friend isn't very smart so I wouldn't trust her with a weapon either. My girlfriend, on the other hand, got mad at me for not checking to see if the revolver was loaded when it was handed to me even after three people had already checked. :oops:
Paging professor Lott. :P
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream

“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by noxiousdog »

Isgrimnur wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:30 pm My father's nightmares about cleaning up a crashed cargo plane in Thailand in the 60s shouldn't preclude him from owning a firearm.
It's fun to see you on the conservative side of a discussion ;)
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82094
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Isgrimnur »

I’ve never been one to be pigeonholed.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Enough
Posts: 14688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:05 pm
Location: Serendipity
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Enough »

Isgrimnur wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 2:15 pm I’ve never been one to be pigeonholed.
No, but you have been a whole pigeon in a past life, no? And agreed, you are probably one of the most purple people on here. :D
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream

“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
User avatar
LordMortis
Posts: 70101
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Shootings

Post by LordMortis »

I ate whole pigeon when I was in France as part of 7 course meal. It was surprisingly good. I never would have guessed, nor would I have considered ordering it. But it was good.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41250
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Shootings

Post by El Guapo »

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:58 pm
His mistakes compound the errors made by other law enforcement entities, including the FBI and Broward County PD.
Comments like that are why gun owners don't feel that the state can protect them.

I wonder if this is a function of our innocent until proven guilty system. As an anecdote, I have a friend who has an abusive husband. She fled the house when he pulled a gun on her daughter. He is on SSDI due to PTSD. He also has a previous domestic violence charge that expired (deferred adjudication?). He's still legally allowed to have a weapon. He also sells drugs, so the legality of the property isn't a hindrance to him. The police came out and did take him to a mental hospital. They did not confiscate the gun. Threatening to kill your own child is not a crime as it's not considered a legitimate threat, so he was released after evaluation. In fact, she was told by the womens' center that the only crime committed was her kidnapping the kids when she fled. Everyone knows the husband is dangerous. His family refused to take him in when she kicked him out (her name is on the lease, his isn't.. no she shouldn't have gone back home, but that's a longer and irrelevant story). But the state can't do anything about it until after someone gets beaten or shot.

Of course it's more likely that the friend harms herself, her kid, or an innocent that defending herself from an abusive husband. But, I think the perceived safety of owning a firearm needs to be protected as we are discussing and implementing regulation. It's great for those of us where our biggest fear is a mass shooting. Way more people have to worry about the crime maps I posted earlier.
I guess where I'm leaning on this stuff these days is that handguns should be reasonably available for self-defense situations such as these, but semi-automatic and automatic weapons should either be banned or restricted so heavily that it is very difficult / rare to obtain one. Companies running hunting businesses would be allowed to rent out more serious weapons for hunting (though the hunting companies would have to register each such weapon with the government and would face fairly stiff penalties if they can't account for them). That's setting aside the formidable political and potentially constitutional difficulties for the moment).
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Shootings

Post by Zaxxon »

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:25 pm
Smoove_B wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:10 pm So in your case, is this a situation where a person with mental health issues should have been denied purchasing a gun in the first place or a scenario where we have someone that was a gun owner that is now in a questionable state of mental health and should have his gun rights re-examined?

Because I'm pretty sure the solutions to both are quite different.
As of today, neither.

As of the future? Maybe we say people diagnosed with PTSD cant' have weapons. I'm ok with that assuming that's a legitimate reason. I don't know enough about PTSD.
Honestly, if the dude felt the need to pull a gun on his wife and kid--and not because he felt his life was in danger, then yes, this is someone who IMO is now in a questionable state of mental health and should have his gun rights re-examined. Isn't one of the first rules of gun ownership to never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy?

I realize that's not the way it works today, but in my ideal future world, when the cops were called they'd have confiscated the gun until the guy underwent some sort of eval.
Regardless of the legality of weapons, he would have acquired one though. Obviously he's fine distributing illegal substances. So, how do we protect the friend?
Great--that's not a reason not to adjust the legality. It's a separate problem to address once we've hit the low-hanging fruit (or while we also address the low-hanging fruit).
User avatar
Combustible Lemur
Posts: 3961
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:17 pm
Location: houston, TX

Re: Shootings

Post by Combustible Lemur »

Isgrimnur wrote:My father's nightmares about cleaning up a crashed cargo plane in Thailand in the 60s shouldn't preclude him from owning a firearm.
But should it trigger a certified interview with a mental health official prior to purchasing said firearm?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Is Scott home? thump thump thump Crash ......No.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82094
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Isgrimnur »

Combustible Lemur wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 2:48 pm
Isgrimnur wrote:My father's nightmares about cleaning up a crashed cargo plane in Thailand in the 60s shouldn't preclude him from owning a firearm.
But should it trigger a certified interview with a mental health official prior to purchasing said firearm?
Without any other symptoms, absolutely not.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
noxiousdog
Posts: 24627
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by noxiousdog »

Zaxxon wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 2:44 pm Great--that's not a reason not to adjust the legality. It's a separate problem to address once we've hit the low-hanging fruit (or while we also address the low-hanging fruit).
It's a separate problem only so far as the small changes to the current laws. I think it's integral to keeping that scope limited prior to those issues being addressed.
Black Lives Matter

"To wield Grond, the mighty hammer of the Federal Government, is to be intoxicated with power beyond what you and I can reckon (though I figure we can ball park it pretty good with computers and maths). Need to tunnel through a mountain? Grond. Kill a mighty ogre? Grond. Hangnail? Grond. Spider? Grond (actually, that's a legit use, moreso than the rest)." - Peacedog
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82094
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Isgrimnur »

Carpet_pissr wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:50 am Enlarge Image

Gotta start somewhere, and voting with money and supporting businesses that are paying attention to these things is a tiny, marginal start. Voting and "will of the people" is apparently bullshit in modern America, but hit a company in the bottom line (or support them due to an action), and shit gets paid attention to.
I don't see Met Life on that graphic.
The insurance giant MetLife is ending a discount program with the National Rifle Association (NRA), becoming the latest business to break ties with the pro-gun group in the wake of the shooting at a Florida high school.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41250
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Shootings

Post by El Guapo »

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:58 pm
His mistakes compound the errors made by other law enforcement entities, including the FBI and Broward County PD.
Comments like that are why gun owners don't feel that the state can protect them.

I wonder if this is a function of our innocent until proven guilty system. As an anecdote, I have a friend who has an abusive husband. She fled the house when he pulled a gun on her daughter. He is on SSDI due to PTSD. He also has a previous domestic violence charge that expired (deferred adjudication?). He's still legally allowed to have a weapon. He also sells drugs, so the legality of the property isn't a hindrance to him. The police came out and did take him to a mental hospital. They did not confiscate the gun. Threatening to kill your own child is not a crime as it's not considered a legitimate threat, so he was released after evaluation. In fact, she was told by the womens' center that the only crime committed was her kidnapping the kids when she fled. Everyone knows the husband is dangerous. His family refused to take him in when she kicked him out (her name is on the lease, his isn't.. no she shouldn't have gone back home, but that's a longer and irrelevant story). But the state can't do anything about it until after someone gets beaten or shot.

Of course it's more likely that the friend harms herself, her kid, or an innocent that defending herself from an abusive husband. But, I think the perceived safety of owning a firearm needs to be protected as we are discussing and implementing regulation. It's great for those of us where our biggest fear is a mass shooting. Way more people have to worry about the crime maps I posted earlier.
If it were illegal for the husband to own the gun in question, wouldn't all these parts be different? His threshold for doing illegal things wouldn't be different, but seems more likely that he'd wind up getting arrested (for owning an illegal weapon) before anyone came to harm.
Black Lives Matter.
User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26891
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Rip »

noxiousdog wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:07 pm
Enough wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 1:00 pm Handguns save lives, not people. At least that's what I thought the pro gun folks have argued for years heh.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Well, in that calculus is this friend isn't very smart so I wouldn't trust her with a weapon either. My girlfriend, on the other hand, got mad at me for not checking to see if the revolver was loaded when it was handed to me even after three people had already checked. :oops:
She is right. If you haven't checked it, it hasn't been checked.
The phrase “it’s unloaded” should never pass your lips and should never be trusted from someone else’s. Unless you are preparing to shoot, your first action with any firearm in all situations should be to point the muzzle in a safe direction, check the chamber, and clear the firearm.
https://www.hunter-ed.com/gun-safety/
User avatar
Combustible Lemur
Posts: 3961
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:17 pm
Location: houston, TX

Re: Shootings

Post by Combustible Lemur »

Isgrimnur wrote:
Combustible Lemur wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 2:48 pm
Isgrimnur wrote:My father's nightmares about cleaning up a crashed cargo plane in Thailand in the 60s shouldn't preclude him from owning a firearm.
But should it trigger a certified interview with a mental health official prior to purchasing said firearm?
Without any other symptoms, absolutely not.
IANAD but if there are no other symptoms than nightmares, is it PTSD?

If not, what's the relevance to the thread?

If so, why should PTSD be different than other mental health issues in which a series of symptoms trigger an evaluation of the patients mental health and a determination towards their potential danger to self and others?

I realize that mental health and guns is a murky issue. But there is plenty of precedent for certified parties to enforce regulations on those deemed mentally ill. Access to mobile handheld death, seems like a solid place for regulation.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Is Scott home? thump thump thump Crash ......No.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82094
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Isgrimnur »

It was a direct response to your brother's post immediately above mine.

And PTSD is a low bar to clear:
To be diagnosed with PTSD, an adult must have all of the following for at least 1 month:
  • At least one re-experiencing symptom
  • At least one avoidance symptom
  • At least two arousal and reactivity symptoms
  • At least two cognition and mood symptoms
Re-experiencing symptoms include:
  • Flashbacks—reliving the trauma over and over, including physical symptoms like a racing heart or sweating
  • Bad dreams
  • Frightening thoughts
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Punisher
Posts: 3951
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 12:05 pm

Re: Shootings

Post by Punisher »

El Guapo wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 2:35 pm
noxiousdog wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:58 pm
His mistakes compound the errors made by other law enforcement entities, including the FBI and Broward County PD.
Comments like that are why gun owners don't feel that the state can protect them.

I wonder if this is a function of our innocent until proven guilty system. As an anecdote, I have a friend who has an abusive husband. She fled the house when he pulled a gun on her daughter. He is on SSDI due to PTSD. He also has a previous domestic violence charge that expired (deferred adjudication?). He's still legally allowed to have a weapon. He also sells drugs, so the legality of the property isn't a hindrance to him. The police came out and did take him to a mental hospital. They did not confiscate the gun. Threatening to kill your own child is not a crime as it's not considered a legitimate threat, so he was released after evaluation. In fact, she was told by the womens' center that the only crime committed was her kidnapping the kids when she fled. Everyone knows the husband is dangerous. His family refused to take him in when she kicked him out (her name is on the lease, his isn't.. no she shouldn't have gone back home, but that's a longer and irrelevant story). But the state can't do anything about it until after someone gets beaten or shot.

Of course it's more likely that the friend harms herself, her kid, or an innocent that defending herself from an abusive husband. But, I think the perceived safety of owning a firearm needs to be protected as we are discussing and implementing regulation. It's great for those of us where our biggest fear is a mass shooting. Way more people have to worry about the crime maps I posted earlier.
I guess where I'm leaning on this stuff these days is that handguns should be reasonably available for self-defense situations such as these, but semi-automatic and automatic weapons should either be banned or restricted so heavily that it is very difficult / rare to obtain one. Companies running hunting businesses would be allowed to rent out more serious weapons for hunting (though the hunting companies would have to register each such weapon with the government and would face fairly stiff penalties if they can't account for them). That's setting aside the formidable political and potentially constitutional difficulties for the moment).
Most handguns ARE semi-automatic weapons. There are some automatic ones though.
All yourLightning Bolts are Belong to Us
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Shootings

Post by Pyperkub »

Isgrimnur wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 3:35 pm It was a direct response to your brother's post immediately above mine.

And PTSD is a low bar to clear:
To be diagnosed with PTSD, an adult must have all of the following for at least 1 month:
  • At least one re-experiencing symptom
  • At least one avoidance symptom
  • At least two arousal and reactivity symptoms
  • At least two cognition and mood symptoms
Re-experiencing symptoms include:
  • Flashbacks—reliving the trauma over and over, including physical symptoms like a racing heart or sweating
  • Bad dreams
  • Frightening thoughts
It's also a small part of the larger issue. What's the bar for mental illness? 13% of Americans are on anti-depressants (over 1 in 8), or at least were in 2015 - could be higher now).

Side note about the armed guard who didn't perform his duty - if an armed guard whose explicit duty is to put his life in harms way freezes, what do we think teachers will do? I'm not seeing Miss Geist (from Clueless) going all Dirty Harry in the event of a school shooter, and I really wouldn't want her to.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82094
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Isgrimnur »

Image
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43501
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Shootings

Post by Blackhawk »

Pyperkub wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 4:20 pm
It's also a small part of the larger issue. What's the bar for mental illness? 13% of Americans are on anti-depressants (over 1 in 8), or at least were in 2015 - could be higher now).
That's a major, major question. If people go hog wild and take away the rights of people treated for mental illness, the major effect is that people with mental illness won't look for treatment. If people continue to stigmatize people with 'mental illness' as a blanket term that doesn't distinguish between those that are dangerous and those that are just dealing with depression or generalized anxiety, then people that need help for non-dangerous conditions won't seek treatment, as it would result in ostracization.

Believe me, it's an issue. I'm on disability mostly due to anxiety problems. Inevitably, meeting someone new results in "So, what do you do?" I used to say that I was on disability. They'd quickly count my arms, then my legs, the ask, "Really? For what?" And I'd have to say, "mental." You should see the looks I'd get. You should have seen the people that made an excuse to avoid me as though I were hearing voices and about to snap.

These days I say, "Homemaker." I still get looks of disrespect around here, but at least it isn't fear and disgust.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82094
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Isgrimnur »

Isgrimnur wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 3:02 pm
Carpet_pissr wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:50 am Enlarge Image

Gotta start somewhere, and voting with money and supporting businesses that are paying attention to these things is a tiny, marginal start. Voting and "will of the people" is apparently bullshit in modern America, but hit a company in the bottom line (or support them due to an action), and shit gets paid attention to.
I don't see Met Life on that graphic.
And Hertz comes off the board
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Shootings

Post by Zaxxon »

From Vox: Arming Teachers Isn't Just a Ridiculous Idea. It's a Deliberate Distraction.

Guess I fell for this one hook, line, & sinker...
German Lopez wrote:As we all concentrate on this, we leave aside other issues that the NRA would rather not talk about — from universal background checks to gun bans to confiscation schemes like Australia’s. So the ridiculous discussion sucks up the oxygen during the few weeks in which there’s a window to do something about guns, nothing happens, and the current situation remains.

This is also true about the focus on mental health care. Every time there’s a mass shooting, gun rights activists — including Republicans and the NRA — argue that the real problem behind mass shootings is the shooter’s mental health. As my colleague Dylan Matthews explained, that’s a very questionable claim — given that the US doesn’t have a monopoly on mental health issues but does have a monopoly on tremendous levels of gun ownership.

But even if you accept the premise that mental health is a major driver of America’s gun problem, with the exception of some individual lawmakers, Republicans are not the party proposing big boosts to mental health care in the US.

Quite the opposite: They spent much of last year trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”), which expanded access to mental health care by getting people insurance that would pay for it. Trump’s budget in particular wouldn’t just eliminate Obamacare, it would also slash funding to other mental health programs — with the National Institute of Mental Health in particular seeing a 30 percent reduction in funding.

So why else would Republicans and the NRA bring up mental health? Because it lets them shift the conversation from guns. So, again, in the few weeks there’s a discussion over this issue, they can stay away from the topics that could lead to changes they don’t like.

We see this again and again. And it works. So the US continues doing little to nothing on guns, and horrific tragedies keep happening.
User avatar
Enough
Posts: 14688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:05 pm
Location: Serendipity
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Enough »

Wait, it wasn't just the school security officer, there were 4 good guys with guns in Parkland, and it didn't do any good?
When Coral Springs police officers arrived at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, on February 14 in the midst of the school shooting crisis, many officers were surprised to find not only that Broward County Sheriff's Deputy Scot Peterson, the armed school resource officer, had not entered the building, but that three other Broward County Sheriff's deputies were also outside the school and had not entered, Coral Springs sources tell CNN. The deputies had their pistols drawn and were behind their vehicles, the sources said, and not one of them had gone into the school.
Gee, I imagine knowing you were likely going against a crazed person with a death wish armed with an AR-15 might be kinda scary.
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream

“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43501
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: Shootings

Post by Blackhawk »

Thar's gonna be a new sheriff in town.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Shootings

Post by GreenGoo »

Talking about this one instance like it's definitive is not particularly important. Just like islands growing instead of sinking. There ARE people who would have been heroic and saved some children, or at least tried to do so. It doesn't matter, because more guns on public school grounds will cause more trouble than they'll save, across the country, over decades. And that's with whatever "professionals" you can get for 13 bucks an hour or whatever you can pay them. Arming teachers would be worse.

So I don't care that there were guns on campus that failed to save the kids, or guns on campus that saved the kids. One event does not make something a good or bad idea. Stats and studies, history and common sense should all play a role.

While it's lucky that this one example is there to refute those who are unable to think that guns are anything but a boon, it is very unlucky for the kids involved. Since the guy was there I wish he was able to stop the shooter. He didn't. I don't see how that's particularly relevant to the gun control debate. It makes for good emotion fodder, but little else.
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Shootings

Post by GreenGoo »

Enough wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 7:29 pm Wait, it wasn't just the school security officer, there were 4 good guys with guns in Parkland, and it didn't do any good?
When Coral Springs police officers arrived at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, on February 14 in the midst of the school shooting crisis, many officers were surprised to find not only that Broward County Sheriff's Deputy Scot Peterson, the armed school resource officer, had not entered the building, but that three other Broward County Sheriff's deputies were also outside the school and had not entered, Coral Springs sources tell CNN. The deputies had their pistols drawn and were behind their vehicles, the sources said, and not one of them had gone into the school.
Gee, I imagine knowing you were likely going against a crazed person with a death wish armed with an AR-15 might be kinda scary.
Not getting shot to death is probably a pretty high priority for most officers. I don't know what the normal protocol is for a situation like this, but deputies are not swat members trained with breaching high risk hostage (with no intel, you have no idea what exactly is happening) situations.

So I don't judge these officers at all, because I don't know what the right response is supposed to be, or whether they followed proper protocol or not. Sure I wish they stormed the castle and saved the kids but I also wish superman was real. Wishes aren't reality. I can *imagine* lots of details that make their actions poor choices or good choices. I have no idea.

If it turns out that they failed in their duties, then I'll be critical. Until then, taking cover seems like a pretty good idea to me.
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 20336
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Shootings

Post by Skinypupy »

I don’t judge the officers either, as they were likely following protocol.

However, it does make the whole “just arm teachers...problem solved!” talking point just that much more absurd.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 23583
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California

Re: Shootings

Post by Pyperkub »

GreenGoo wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 7:43 pm If it turns out that they failed in their duties, then I'll be critical. Until then, taking cover seems like a pretty good idea to me.
Even so, even military men freeze under fire sometimes.

More guns is NOT the answer.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!

Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
User avatar
Grifman
Posts: 21196
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm

Re: Shootings

Post by Grifman »

Skinypupy wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:17 pm I don’t judge the officers either, as they were likely following protocol.

However, it does make the whole “just arm teachers...problem solved!” talking point just that much more absurd.
Not likely. Protocol for an active shooter situation is to enter the building and put the shooter down ASAP. This has been the standard since Columbine, where officers waited outside.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
Enough
Posts: 14688
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:05 pm
Location: Serendipity
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Enough »

GreenGoo wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 7:43 pm
Enough wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 7:29 pm Wait, it wasn't just the school security officer, there were 4 good guys with guns in Parkland, and it didn't do any good?
When Coral Springs police officers arrived at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, on February 14 in the midst of the school shooting crisis, many officers were surprised to find not only that Broward County Sheriff's Deputy Scot Peterson, the armed school resource officer, had not entered the building, but that three other Broward County Sheriff's deputies were also outside the school and had not entered, Coral Springs sources tell CNN. The deputies had their pistols drawn and were behind their vehicles, the sources said, and not one of them had gone into the school.
Gee, I imagine knowing you were likely going against a crazed person with a death wish armed with an AR-15 might be kinda scary.
Not getting shot to death is probably a pretty high priority for most officers. I don't know what the normal protocol is for a situation like this, but deputies are not swat members trained with breaching high risk hostage (with no intel, you have no idea what exactly is happening) situations.

So I don't judge these officers at all, because I don't know what the right response is supposed to be, or whether they followed proper protocol or not. Sure I wish they stormed the castle and saved the kids but I also wish superman was real. Wishes aren't reality. I can *imagine* lots of details that make their actions poor choices or good choices. I have no idea.

If it turns out that they failed in their duties, then I'll be critical. Until then, taking cover seems like a pretty good idea to me.
It looks like I need to clarify the post. It's not criticism of the officers, it's a rejection of the idea that having one armed person on site would automagically have solved this as our POTUS postulates. We had four.
My blog (mostly photos): Fort Ephemera - My Flickr Photostream

“You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn’t waste either.” ―Galen Rowell
User avatar
Zaxxon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 28118
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:11 am
Location: Surrounded by Mountains

Re: Shootings

Post by Zaxxon »

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Shootings

Post by GreenGoo »

Enough wrote: Fri Feb 23, 2018 8:34 pm It looks like I need to clarify the post.
Not really, I was just writing down my own thoughts on the matter, not counter-pointing you or anyone else.
User avatar
Skinypupy
Posts: 20336
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
Location: Utah

Re: Shootings

Post by Skinypupy »

Well, this should make things better. Trump just called the officer a coward and said "he doesn't love those children"
President Donald Trump said Friday the armed sheriff's deputy who sought cover instead of charging into a building at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School during last week's deadly shooting "doesn’t love the children" he was assigned to guard.

“A security guard doesn’t know the children, doesn’t love the children," Trump said during a bilateral press conference with the Australian Prime Minister at the White House. "This man standing outside of the school the other day doesn’t love the children, probably doesn’t know the children."

Earlier Friday Trump bemoaned the inaction from Broward County deputy Scot Peterson, who resigned Thursday after surveillance footage revealed he did not intervene in the shooting despite being the only armed official on hand as it began.

"He’s trained his whole life ... but when it came time to get in there and do something he didn’t have the courage, or something happened, but he certainly did a poor job," Trump told reporters as he left the White House. "There’s no question about that.”
I'd like to think that if I had trained for that scenario, I would have the courage to charge in and try to save the day. But I honestly have no idea if I would or not, especially knowing it could very likely be my death.

This guard failed - just like many of us would in that same situation - and he has to live with those consequences. I fail to see how publicly calling him a coward is going to help the situation any.
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.
User avatar
Combustible Lemur
Posts: 3961
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:17 pm
Location: houston, TX

Re: Shootings

Post by Combustible Lemur »

Blackhawk and Isgrimnur

I appreciate the direct response. Is there, do you think an appropriate line? As a teacher the bar is low. A kid having a bad day can trip the interview line. Probably because when dealing with teenagers, it's sometime hard to tell between I'm a a snotty teenager and today is the 1yr. anniversary of my dad's death and I may be a threat to myself because my stepmom makes me feel worthless. Or the fuzzy line between I'm a serial killer and I'm an awkward little boy who's parents are divorcing and am woefully unprepared to deal with a society filled with nonviolent or abusive human beings.

With the ridiculously high rate of veteran suicides, and gun related suicides in general, my uninformed mind feels that the line is currently much too high in the adult world.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Is Scott home? thump thump thump Crash ......No.
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82094
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Shootings

Post by Isgrimnur »

You want to lower the line, fine. But sliding literally millions of Americans under it because they sought help for an issue is beyond the pale. If you note the definition (which I failed to link previously), there are no indications toward violence from the sufferers as part of the diagnosis. And there should at least be flags of violence or suicidal activity before you start trying to remove rights from people.

Threats today generate interviews. NYTimes
In the hours after the shooting, people who knew [him] described him as a “troubled kid” who enjoyed showing off his firearms, bragging about killing animals and whose mother would resort to calling the police to have them come to their home to try to talk some sense into him.
But apply that to those flags to the population at large. How many of us knew a kid like that? How many of them ended up shooting up a place? Sometimes the weird kid gets a second chance and straightens himself out.

We don't have the resources or the desire as a society to start tailing the weird kids on the off chance that they're doing something or working toward something illegal. There's plenty of crime to keep most cops busy.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
Post Reply