Preventing Mass Murders; It's the Person, not the Weapon

[BubberMiley]

If you read my opnening post I'd be in favor of eliminating weapons, or at least their public circulation, if it were feasible.

Exactly. You included nuclear weapons in your list of technologies you wish we could dis-invent but cannot.

Iwonder what other solution he has for that particular fruitcake.

I don't have another solution. I believe that while we can't "dis-invent" the technology, we can make reasonable attempts to limit its access. In your OP, guns and nuclear weapons were technologies that were equally "dis-inventable." But in the case of nuclear weapons, now, it's possible to selectively dis-invent them?

[jbg]

But in the case of nuclear weapons, now, it's possible to selectively dis-invent them?

It's much easier to disinvent them or terminate their possessors with extreme prejudice.

[BubberMiley]

It's much easier to disinvent them or terminate their possessors with extreme prejudice.

Much easier? In the OP, it was, alas, "impossible."

[gunrutz]

http://www.castanet.net/edition/news-story-116272-1-.htm#116272

This is the kind of prejuduice that gun onwers face in this country, it used to be that I could walk down the road with a rifle to a hunting spot when I was a kid, doing that now is likely to get you arrested, nothing illegal about it, but those who fear the thing while knowing nothing about them always know best.

Of course some here probably don't care that their bigotry and ignorance leads to a society where a legal gun owner gets taken down in fornt of his child by police to placate the concerns of an idiot neighbor.

[Michael Hardner]

Of course some here probably don't care that their bigotry and ignorance leads to a society where a legal gun owner gets taken down in fornt of his child by police to placate the concerns of an idiot neighbor.

It sounds like the police don't know the law in this case ?

[jbg]

Much easier? In the OP, it was, alas, "impossible."

Collecting all handguns is impossible. Knocking off a few imams; maybe easier.

[Peter F]

Knocking off anyone is easy with a firearm. Is that not the point of the OP?

[WestCoastRunner]

If there were ever a good reason to adopt more gun control in the U.S.. 'Joe the Plumber' is a good example. His latest quote on his blog:

"Guns are mostly for hunting down politicians who would actively seek to take your freedoms and liberty away from you," Google 'Hitler, Mao, Kim Jung Il, Castro, Stalin' just for starters."

What's disturbing about this reckless quote is that it could encourage a mentally unstable individual to feel justified in shooting an elected official who is willing to stand up to the NRA. We only need to look at Gifford to see what happened there.

[Guest]

But think of the lives he would have saved!

[bush_cheney2004]

Americans shooting politicians is hardly new or the acts of just the unstable.

It is a very American tradition...even a Palestinian got in on the action back in 1968.

[On Guard for Thee]

If there were ever a good reason to adopt more gun control in the U.S.. 'Joe the Plumber' is a good example. His latest quote on his blog:

"Guns are mostly for hunting down politicians who would actively seek to take your freedoms and liberty away from you," Google 'Hitler, Mao, Kim Jung Il, Castro, Stalin' just for starters."

What's disturbing about this reckless quote is that it could encourage a mentally unstable individual to feel justified in shooting an elected official who is willing to stand up to the NRA. We only need to look at Gifford to see what happened there.

If you happen to be a "Day 6" fan on CBC, check out todays episode. An interesting discussion on the latter part of what you've said here.

http://www.cbc.ca/day6/popupaudio.html?clipIds=2461178006

[On Guard for Thee]

Americans shooting politicians is hardly new or the acts of just the unstable.

It is a very American tradition...even a Palestinian got in on the action back in 1968.

Pretty much acts of the unstable. But you have to be stable to recognize that.

[GostHacked]

Collecting all handguns is impossible. Knocking off a few imams; maybe easier.

How would that help? The program continues no matter who is in charge.

[eyeball]

"Guns are mostly for hunting down politicians who would actively seek to take your freedoms and liberty away from you," Google 'Hitler, Mao, Kim Jung Il, Castro, Stalin' just for starters."

Guns don't necessarily make people free, Iraqis for example had guns up the ying-yang when Saddam Hussein was in power.

[BubberMiley]

Collecting all handguns is impossible. Knocking off a few imams; maybe easier.

So rather than gun control, you would prefer a system where those who acquire too many guns and are perceived as a potential threat be pre-emptively "knocked off"? Sounds radical to me.

[WestCoastRunner]

If you happen to be a "Day 6" fan on CBC, check out todays episode. An interesting discussion on the latter part of what you've said here.

http://www.cbc.ca/day6/popupaudio.html?clipIds=2461178006

I did not hear that program but I did read the article associated with it on the CBC website. It is an interesting debate. Should the media cover the killer's name, history etc in great detail and at great length? I don't think so, however initially it should be reported and then it is only appropriate to focus on the victims and how to prevent such incidents from happening again.

An interesting comment I read in the article was that if there wasn't as much media coverage focused on the killer, the target the killer chooses could be downsized. (ie instead of selecting a kindergarten class, maybe just the immediate family).

[kimmy]

I am not saying it is the role of untrained people to be psychologists. Far from it. But when people are left friendless for long periods, and no one reaches out to them a tragedy will sometimes occur. It is our job, as a society, to know our neighbors, students and colleagues.

I feel that forming real communities will solve some of these problems. Trying to remove the implements of crime from people who are far beyond obeying any law of any kind is futile and useless.

Some argue that putting restrictions on legal sales of guns is useless because criminals can just go to the black market to get guns. And that might be true for some types of criminals, but it's not true for the Elliot Rodgers or Adam Lanzas or Marc Lepines of the world.

Anybody who's seen a few episodes of Sons Of Anarchy can appreciate how difficult it would be to put an end to black market firearms. No argument there.

But the deranged loners who have committed many of these crimes don't have black market connections. They don't even have contacts, let alone black market contacts. If these guys can't buy their firearms legally, what are they going to do? Hit up Craigslist and start asking around? When people who don't know how to criminal get the idea that they want to criminal, they are often highly conspicuous and attract attention of law enforcement. Whether it is would-be spouse-killers attempting to hire hitmen, or would-be thieves attempting to fence stuff, or would-be johns trying to find a prostitute, or would-be drug users trying to find drugs, the story is the same. This is the part of the plan where the would-be criminals expose their intentions to somebody else, and law enforcement people know this and use this opportunity to catch people who are in the process of criminal acts. The "Toronto 14" attempting to buy fertilizer is a perfect example of what happens when people who don't know what they're doing try to become criminal masterminds.

If Elliot Rodgers didn't have access to legal firearms, he'd have probably got flagged while trying to obtain them illegally. If somebody like Elliot Rodgers could have obtained a gun from an illegal source, an undercover law enforcement agent would have obtained a gun from the illegal source first, and shut the source down. An illegal source that's easy enough to find to be accessible to a dweeb like Elliot Rodgers is an illegal source that's easy enough for the cops to find.

On the subject of community: you can't really have a community with more than a couple hundred members. When groups reach a certain size, they stop being being groups and start breaking into smaller groups. Sure you might have a club with thousands of members, but nobody in that club knows everybody in the club at a personal level. There might be a number of circles of friends within the club that, collectively, encompass everybody in the club, and the circles of friends might overlap, but no one person in the club knows everybody at a personal level, and nobody in the club can be sure that any particular member of that club is part of somebody's circle of friends. The pastor at the church down the street probably knows each member of his congregation, but Joel Osteen certainly doesn't know each member of his multi-thousand member congregation.

I was reading yesterday that Rodgers' parents had seen some of his recent video rants and became so concerned that they contacted the police. And the police actually sent a couple of officers to interview Rodgers, but they concluded that he seemed normal and non-threatening. But the officers hadn't actually watched the videos that alarmed Rodgers' parents, so Rodgers wasn't actually confronted with the stuff he'd been saying.

-k

[kimmy]

I did not hear that program but I did read the article associated with it on the CBC website. It is an interesting debate. Should the media cover the killer's name, history etc in great detail and at great length? I don't think so, however initially it should be reported and then it is only appropriate to focus on the victims and how to prevent such incidents from happening again.

I think that understanding Rodgers' motivations and circumstances is an important part of trying to prevent such incidents.

-k

[cybercoma]

Some argue that putting restrictions on legal sales of guns is useless because criminals can just go to the black market to get guns. And that might be true for some types of criminals, but it's not true for the Elliot Rodgers or Adam Lanzas or Marc Lepines of the world.

-k

It also makes the black market a lot more expensive. A gun on the black market in Canada is about $2000-3000. In the US, you're talking $500-600.

[bush_cheney2004]

It is a simple matter to buy a gun in the U.S. without any such drama....no "black market"....no "Sons of Anarchy" TV show conditions required. In most states, it is completely legal to buy a firearm from another citizen as a private sale no more complicated than buying a used lawnmower. I have purchased and sold guns this way, and the "community" develops from gun ranges, shooting sports, gun collecting, and hunting.

[Big Guy]

...

An interesting comment I read in the article was that if there wasn't as much media coverage focused on the killer, the target the killer chooses could be downsized. (ie instead of selecting a kindergarten class, maybe just the immediate family).

There is a growing movement in that direction;

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/05/mass-murder-should-not-be-a-ticket-to-fame/371599/

A prominent CNN anchor and other reporters have decided not to use the killers names and not to show any associated videos. Not sure if its going to help but the theory is that these deranged folks are looking for a stage and if you remove their audience then the reason for the killing may also be minimized.

[kimmy]

It is a simple matter to buy a gun in the U.S. without any such drama....no "black market"....no "Sons of Anarchy" TV show conditions required. In most states, it is completely legal to buy a firearm from another citizen as a private sale no more complicated than buying a used lawnmower.

Yeah, that's kind of the point. It ought to be more complicated than buying a used lawnmower. Even the NRA concedes that there are people who shouldn't be allowed to own guns. There ought to be official documentation of gun licenses and serial numbers, and if you get caught selling a gun to somebody who doesn't have a valid license, you should be in deep trouble.

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

Yeah, that's kind of the point. It ought to be more complicated than buying a used lawnmower. Even the NRA concedes that there are people who shouldn't be allowed to own guns. There ought to be official documentation of gun licenses and serial numbers, and if you get caught selling a gun to somebody who doesn't have a valid license, you should be in deep trouble.

And yet, the NRA is not lobbying for changes to state law that would prevent such private sales. The constitutional rights of law abiding citizens will not be infringed because of actions by criminals and/or the mentally ill.

The "point" is that millions of such sales take place, and the "vast majority" do not result in illegal activity. The NRA does advocate for the enforcement of existing gun laws before passing yet more "feel good" legislation.

Edited June 1, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[kimmy]

And yet, the NRA is not lobbying for changes to state law that would prevent such private sales.

Of course not. That's not their mandate. However, even they concede the point:

National mandatory background checks for all private party firearm sales are again part of the national conversation. There are people who everyone agrees should not be able to buy a gun—convicted violent criminals and those currently awaiting trial or sentencing for such crimes, illegal aliens, people with serious mental illness problems. If the background check was free, fast, and did not produce any gun or gun owner registration lists, it would likely face less opposition from gun rights advocates. But such a system is a far cry from recent proposals.

And (to coin a phrase) "they were for it before they were against it."

"We think it's reasonable to provide mandatory instant criminal background checks for every sale at every gun show. No loopholes anywhere for anyone. That means closing the Hinckley loophole so the records of those adjudicated mentally ill are in the system. This isn't new, or a change of position, or a concession. I've been on record on this point consistently, from our national meeting in Denver, to paid national ads and position papers, to news interviews and press appearances."

-NRA head honk Wayne Lapierre, testifying to Congress in 1999 after Columbine.

The constitutional rights of law abiding citizens will not be infringed because of actions by criminals and/or the mentally ill.

So there should be no restriction on the 2nd Amendment? Any American, whether they be convicted violent criminals, or mentally ill, or 9 years old, or senile, shall have the absolute and indisputable right to own firearms, without restriction?

Is that how the courts have generally interpreted it?

-k

[On Guard for Thee]

Yeah, that's kind of the point. It ought to be more complicated than buying a used lawnmower. Even the NRA concedes that there are people who shouldn't be allowed to own guns. There ought to be official documentation of gun licenses and serial numbers, and if you get caught selling a gun to somebody who doesn't have a valid license, you should be in deep trouble.

-k

Yeah, that's kind of the point. It ought to be more complicated than buying a used lawnmower. Even the NRA concedes that there are people who shouldn't be allowed to own guns. There ought to be official documentation of gun licenses and serial numbers, and if you get caught selling a gun to somebody who doesn't have a valid license, you should be in deep trouble.

-k

Apparently in this case, it being in Cal. there is a registry, and his name was on it, but the cops didn't bother to check. Which I find odd since when they went to see him it was because of a call from his mother concerned about his mental health. As far back as 1999, when his parents divorced there was documentation of his mental health problems. I understand at that time the problem was autism, which apparently does not usually end up in violence. However the call made by the mother stemmed from the videos he had posted which again the cops didn't bother to watch. Had they of checked the registry they would have known he had (at least) 3 9mm's and a boatload of ammo. So, you have mentally ill people, with nutbar videos on facebook, walking, or in this case driving, around heavily armed, in a state that supposidly has "tough" gun laws. And the NRA flogging this idiocy about "the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun, blah blah blah"

You know damn well there are lot's more of these to come.