If automatic meant select fire it would be accurate, but it would be incomplete.
Automatic apparently means (or can mean) that the gun reloads the chamber for you rather than say bolt action or a revolver. It doesn't HAVE to mean select fire or pull the trigger and the bullets come out until you let go.
These definitions are well established and long standing.
By who and where? Part of the problem with legislating this sort of thing, as i recall, was the lack of a definition.
They really aren't in dispute among military, law enforcement, and shooting professionals.
But news writers are not military law enforcement or shooting professionals. IF they're an expert in something its usually English. 'Grrrr. the dictionary/encyclopedia is wrong' makes sense, I don't think that 'The dictionary or encyclopedia is wrong and the news people should know to override it' is fair to the news people.
Politicians and the media literally make up terms like "assault weapon" to mislead people and influence policy.
I would not be so quick to conclude malfeasance when incompetence is a suspect.
I really think the use of language by communication professionals should have some self discipline and intellectual honesty.
What source, specifically, are they supposed to be going to for their terminology? What word do you use to describe the civilian ar 15 so that it means anything to the audience?
Actually, Facts are supposed to be the very heart of journalism. If the can't get the type of firearm correct, which they rarely do, how can you be sure the rest of what they are reporting is accurate?So this thread is turning into, "It's so sad the way a dozen people were killed, but the media doesn't even know which guns they're talking about!"
Shifty, BT: the difference between fully automatic and semi automatic, and which of those should actually be called an assault weapon is just about the least important part of what happened.
Bais towards fairness; just because we don't know which sort of gun he used doesn't mean nobody was killed.
Edit: okay, so I did get political, much sooner than I promised; but not, like, with an agenda... /blush
If automatic meant select fire it would be accurate, but it would be incomplete.Automatic apparently means (or can mean) that the gun reloads the chamber for you rather than say bolt action or a revolver. It doesn't HAVE to mean select fire or pull the trigger and the bullets come out until you let go.
These definitions are well established and long standing.By who and where? Part of the problem with legislating this sort of thing, as i recall, was the lack of a definition.
They really aren't in dispute among military, law enforcement, and shooting professionals.But news writers are not military law enforcement or shooting professionals. IF they're an expert in something its usually English. 'Grrrr. the dictionary/encyclopedia is wrong' makes sense, I don't think that 'The dictionary or encyclopedia is wrong and the news people should know to override it' is fair to the news people.
Politicians and the media literally make up terms like "assault weapon" to mislead people and influence policy.I would not be so quick to conclude malfeasance when incompetence is a suspect.
I really think the use of language by communication professionals should have some self discipline and intellectual honesty.What source, specifically, are they supposed to be going to for their terminology? What word do you use to describe the civilian ar 15 so that it means anything to the audience?
This is why the terms semiautomatic and full auto or select fire have been in use for decades. They have specific definitions in training and specific legal definition. The ATFE's legal definitions are often vague and convoluted, but if you ask any novice fire arms instructor what semi auto and full auto mean they should be able to tell you.
I don't expect reporters to be firearms experts. I would like for them to do some damned research and have some intellectual integrity.
I have watched the media distort firearms related reporting for more than a quarter of a century in the same way. They might just all be incredibly lazy and stupid and ignorant, but I think malfeasance is more likely.
They could google something to start with. They could use the truth to describe an AR15. It's normally a semiautomatic rifle chambered for 5.56MM with a detachable magazine. It's basically a civilian version of an M16 or M4. It's actually pretty easy.
I think they are doing research, they just haven't had the time to get it on air. This happened last night, and I don't think the police have released the forensic information yet. That means nothing can be verified.
I'll admit that I'm selective about my news sources, but I don't see how "intellectual integrity" even has a place in the discussion yet.
Prayers to all involed in this horrid tragdy and hope all can resume some sort of normal life once again. As for the living terror hope he receives deserved justice by man and all the higher powers that be. My heart goes out to colordo.
I think they are doing research, they just haven't had the time to get it on air. This happened last night, and I don't think the police have released the forensic information yet. That means nothing can be verified.
I'll admit that I'm selective about my news sources, but I don't see how "intellectual integrity" even has a place in the discussion yet.
Sigh.
They could start by not reporting that the shooter bought a machine gun at Bass Pro Shop or whatever store he bought the AR from.
You can't buy a machine gun or an assault rifle at Walmart.
EDIT: Gander Mountain per the AP probably.
Yeah, I heard about this today. And then read some of the reports. One thing that bothers me though, at least one media source was playing this up like the guy was trying to emulate the character Bane from the movie. (with the body armor and "mask")
I have to admit though, when I first heard about it, I thought, "This guy thought he was a supervilian."
Where I live (Virginia) a guy got shot to death by the police a few years back, like 20 mins from where my house is. This guy was fascinated/obsessed with the Joker character played by Heath Ledger in the second Batman movie. He was wanted for questioning in the shooting of a police officer in a nearby state and was thought to have a kidnap victim with him (turns out she was an accomplice) Anyway, he was driving recklessly and evading the police (and I should add he was dressed as the Joker as well) and believed to be armed. (which he was) The police did what they had to, but it was all very shocking.
I guess my fear is that society will label this as another example of how fantasy, especiially violent fantasy, messes with peoples minds and concept of reality. (Chris Nolan's films are especially "intense") I dont know about you guys, but where I live gamers are still viewed as borderline sociopaths ( a bit of an exaggeration, but not much) and DnD is still viewed by some as the "Devil's Work". No joke, there was a tent revival here a few years back where "demons" were cast out of former Dnd players.
But I digress. My sympathies to the victims and families. I just hope people dont go blaming various "entertainments" again and instead take some responsibility for their kids and communities.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My prayers, thoughts and well-wishes to the victims.
How 'bout wee not politicize this matter for 3 days or so?
3 days of introspection on what is best and good in our lives and the lives of all those we know. It could have been any one of us in there enjoying a movie ....
The inevitable problem is that once the initial reporting is done, the spin starts. Whether for political purposes, or because when you're a 24 hour news network you have to have your people talking about something, there's always the spin, the speculation, the stretching until the tragedy becomes just another circus tent.
Of course he was wearing a mask. He brought in gas canisters. The mask was so he wouldn't be affected by it. But of course since it's a superhero movie, we have to be entertained by all the speculation of whether he was influenced by a movie that just got released that very night. The answer is probably not. He was too busy shooting people to watch. It would be good of them to deal with the tragedy first before sending in the clowns.
Actually, Facts are supposed to be the very heart of journalism. If the can't get the type of firearm correct, which they rarely do, how can you be sure the rest of what they are reporting is accurate?So this thread is turning into, "It's so sad the way a dozen people were killed, but the media doesn't even know which guns they're talking about!"
Shifty, BT: the difference between fully automatic and semi automatic, and which of those should actually be called an assault weapon is just about the least important part of what happened.
Oh for the love of god. The thing looks like a M-16. Witnesses likely told the press the guy had an assault rifle. If the press then reported an assault weapon, something that looks like n assault rifle but is only semi-auto, that would appear to be accurate. For some reason criminals seem to favor assault weapons over hunting rifles, regardless of the hunting rifles being the better semi-automatic weapon.
|
Apparently the guy booby trapped his home with explosives, trip wires etc. He's calling himself the joker, and there's some discussion of banning costumes at premieres?
In any case, there's families out there who have lost children, parents, siblings and friends. I wish Superman could fly anticlockwise around the world to undo this horrific act. It seems so out of whack, that the world has so many supervillains, but no heroes to stop them. :-(
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
OK I'm going to say something political now, but it's not necessarily sided or anything, so I hope it doesn't get terminated.
Obviously what happened in Denver is a horrible, horrible tragedy. Nothing more needs to be said, as this thread is largely of commiseration.
But people using the actions of one wackjob as ammunition to reduce the rights of another group of people (gun owners, people who wear costumes to premieres, etc.) or to fuel a political agenda (EDIT: wanted to make it clear no one here in this thread is doing that, but it's clear that certain talking heads are attempting to), need to stop that. I think that the tiny, tiny minority of people who are going to do these sorts of things are not going to be deterred by unreasonable curtailing of liberties levied upon the rest of us.
I think it does behoove us to discover, through means of the justice system already in place, whether this guy was genuinely crazy or just evil.
At some point and on some level, as a society, we are going to have to accept that bad people do bad things. Mourn for the loss of life, punish the guilty, and move on. It's a difficult thing, to see something like this and think that the system in place allowed this to happen and/or that something needs to be changed, but I think it's the mature thing to do to accept that it's part of the price we pay to live in a free society.
Just found this...
Following is a preliminary, raw transcript of the first 30 minutes of the call log from Aurora Police Department dispatch tapes after the fatal shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado.
01:00:30 315 and 314 there is at least 1 person that's been shot but they're saying there's hundreds of people just running around. 01:00:36
01:03:42 315 be advised i think somebody's sprayed some gas over there too. 01:03:46
01:03:59 316 i need a rescue in here hot, see we got a guy shot. Inside of theater 9? Just outside of theater 9. 01:04:08
01:04:25 team 6 we got another person outside shot in the leg, a female, i got people running outside the theater that are shot in room 9. 01:04:33
01:04:39 318 i got another victim on the north side of this theater the parking lot. 01:04:43
01:05:05 from what I’m smelling inside I can – smells like it’s OC, maybe 2
01:05:14 get us some damn gas masks for theater 9 we can’t get in it
01:06:14 16 I need a marked car behind the theater stable side,suspect in a gas mask. 01:06:22
01:06:50 everyone hold the air one second, cars where that white car in the rear of the lot, is that a suspect? YES! we've got rifles, gas masks, you can see him ive got a open door going into the theater, OK hold that position, hold that suspect! 01:07:05
01:09:23 16 I got 7 down in theater 9! & down! 01:09:28
01:09:58 one of the shooters might be wearing a white and blue plaid shirt 01:10:03
01:10:09 I’ve got a child victim, I need rescue at the back door of theater 9 now! 01:10:13
01:12:29 (woman crying hysterically, help!) 01:12:34 (heard in the background; it’s a woman with a groaning cry)
01:13:07 I’ve got one victim eviscerated 01:13:09
01:14:21 I need somebody to shut this movie off in 9, how do we shut the movie off in 9?
01:14:29 everybody get on this, it's an assault rifle, we got magazines down inside, everybody watch out for the assault rifle. 01:14:35
01:14:55 do I have permission to start taking some of these victims via car? We’ve got a whole bunch of people shot out here and no rescue … yes, load ‘em up, get ‘em in cars, get ‘em out of here.
01:15:08 we have one we cannot move in theater 9
01:15:23 notify all the hospitals we’ve got people coming in
01:16:12 if they are mobile, get them outside. We’ve got a few that are not mobile.
01:23:47 the guy's still in theater 9 im working on a backboards for taht female. 01:23:51
01:25:01 suspect is going to be male, unknown race, black camo outside outfit believed to be wearing a vest, gas mask and multiple long guns. 01:25:10
PS: My posting of the list of guns seems to have touched some nerves with people. I apologize.
EDIT: Forgot to cite my source, click here to see the article.
|
I work with crazy for a living. I am going to bet there was some history of crazy with this guy (in large part because of how the family reacted) and that the crazy was documented.
So while I agree people should be able to generally have guns, and I even agree with proper licensing and certification people should be able to carry concealed weapons, can we all please agree that not allowing crazy to carry guns is a good idea.
And further, can we all agree creating a national registry of crazy who shouldn't get guns is a good idea?
Or have we gotten that far away from logic and reason?
|
|
I work with crazy for a living. I am going to bet there was some history of crazy with this guy (in large part because of how the family reacted) and that the crazy was documented.
So while I agree people should be able to generally have guns, and I even agree with proper licensing and certification people should be able to carry concealed weapons, can we all please agree that not allowing crazy to carry guns is a good idea.
And further, can we all agree creating a national registry of crazy who shouldn't get guns is a good idea?
Or have we gotten that far away from logic and reason?
Of course, that requires defining crazy and even if there's a history of crazy it might not be an official history: He might not have been diagnosed and/or treated.
What this, along with many of the other mass shootings, might point at is not problems with our gun control laws, but problems with our mental health system.
As a probation officer, I can tell you there is almost always a history of some kind. And given the families reaction, specifically saying "You've got the right guy" less than 24 hours after the incident, I would be shocked if he hadn't seen someone.
It could be something as simple as therapists being able to flag someone. Would some people not be able to get a gun as a result. Yes. Set up an appeal process.
But I will be shocked if when this all shakes out someone in a professional capacity didn't flag this guy as dangerous in the past, but didn't have the ability to do anything about it.
Remember Virginia Tech?
They have specific definitions in training and specific legal definition. The ATFE's legal definitions are often vague and convoluted, but if you ask any novice fire arms instructor what semi auto and full auto mean they should be able to tell you.
Right, but do you see how you're trying to say that they should go to a firearms instructor as the legitimate source of information rather than something thats written down in a book? It might be a good idea, but its not the only idea. Its also very problematic in terms of journalism because its hard to verify something that the individual (aka, just some guy) you call up is saying or how widely known his credentials are. Citing book or a legal definition is a better form of cover thine rear , which takes far more precedence than getting things technically right.
They could use the truth to describe an AR15. It's normally a semiautomatic rifle chambered for 5.56MM with a detachable magazine.
That describes it, but it doesn't say what it IS.
Most of that description is useless to the general public (or at least the very dim view the media and entertainment industry means to the public). I thought semi-automatic meant something other than what it apparently does, and i have no idea what a 5.56mm is or where it falls on the scale of BB's to hand cannons.
It also doesn't evoke any emotion, and more than a political slant the media is trying to sell a STORY.
|
|
I work with crazy for a living. I am going to bet there was some history of crazy with this guy (in large part because of how the family reacted) and that the crazy was documented.
So while I agree people should be able to generally have guns, and I even agree with proper licensing and certification people should be able to carry concealed weapons, can we all please agree that not allowing crazy to carry guns is a good idea.
And further, can we all agree creating a national registry of crazy who shouldn't get guns is a good idea?
Or have we gotten that far away from logic and reason?
It wouldn't have helped. By all accounts published so far. This fellow gave absolutely no, zero indication, performed no action that would have put him on such a list.
Given that we still don't have a handle on defining normality, how would we define crazy?
That and the NRA lobby would shoot it down faster than you can spit.
The NRA can bite me. They and the right have adopted the "camels nose under the tent" doctrine on everything.
I would bet money this dude was in counseling somewhere at some point, based on the families reaction. And I would also bet the therapist had concerns that made them think dude shouldn't have guns.
If not in this case, it would have helped stop Virginia Tech, but I will be shocked if he didn't have history given the seeming lack of surprise by the family.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a little wary of psychologists or psychiatrists being granted the extralegal ability to take away someone's rights without a trial, especially given the highly subjective nature of what they do. It might also discourage people from seeking help they need in the first place.
It trips me up what his mother said. Link
"You have the right person," she said, apparently speaking on gut instinct. "I need to call the police... I need to fly out to Colorado."
If that's your first reaction to hearing your child is a suspect odds are you knew something was wrong and should have called the cops before they did anything.
|
Actually, Facts are supposed to be the very heart of journalism. If the can't get the type of firearm correct, which they rarely do, how can you be sure the rest of what they are reporting is accurate?So this thread is turning into, "It's so sad the way a dozen people were killed, but the media doesn't even know which guns they're talking about!"
Shifty, BT: the difference between fully automatic and semi automatic, and which of those should actually be called an assault weapon is just about the least important part of what happened.
Bais towards fairness; just because we don't know which sort of gun he used doesn't mean nobody was killed.
How deliberately obtuse.
Pretty sure no one has suggested that these tragic deaths didn't occur. However there is in fact an innocent man who received several death threats because ABC was in such a hurry to make political accusations.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It trips me up what his mother said. Link
"You have the right person," she said, apparently speaking on gut instinct. "I need to call the police... I need to fly out to Colorado."
If that's your first reaction to hearing your child is a suspect odds are you knew something was wrong and should have called the cops before they did anything.
I couldn't play the clip. Was there more to the context? The words used in segments made like it did in the article could illustrate one thing the reporter was trying to push as an agenda that the mom knew her son had the potential to frame such a heinous act, but it could also be part of a larger context where information was provided to help better identify that they had the right individual by that name. I'm sure some of you have read other articles such as this where the typical leeroy jenkins mob mentality is hounding anyone they can that has a similar name that lives within proximity. Or those setting up "fan pages" to target their ire.
No one should contribute to that douchedrama.
|
|
I couldn't play the clip. Was there more to the context? The words used in segments made like it did in the article could illustrate one thing the reporter was trying to push as an agenda that the mom knew her son had the potential to frame such a heinous act, but it could also be part of a larger context where information was provided to help better identify that they had the right individual by that name.It trips me up what his mother said. Link
"You have the right person," she said, apparently speaking on gut instinct. "I need to call the police... I need to fly out to Colorado."
If that's your first reaction to hearing your child is a suspect odds are you knew something was wrong and should have called the cops before they did anything.
Yeah, I'd like to see the full transcript of that phone call.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And as expected, his neighbors are saying he was
Quiet
Nerdy
Clean cut
Bookish
seemed intelligent
Kept to himself
Most killers I have read about have this description. So far no talk of a fascination with weaponry. Police stated they will enter the apt today. I want to know what they find.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm, this incident brings up some interesting points. As always, most of us are thinking how did it get to this point with this guy? Why didnt someone do something before it came to this?
Well, its hard to do anything until someone steps over the line and has a violent episode. How can we be pre-emptive without being unfair and denying people their rights?
I remember after 911 people complaining about the Patriot act and all the invasive measures the government was using. At the same time there were Congressional hearrrings going on about WHY 911 happened in the first place..aka "Why didnt you prevent this and catch the bad guys before it happened?" And of course, "profiling" has been an issue for years now. (Sorry, if something is true 90% of the time, it may be an unfair world view, but its a place to start if you are trying to prevent a specific type of crime, etc. No flames plz) We cant have it both ways, it would be nice if the bad guys wore badges that said "Hi, I'm a terrorist!" or something like that but they dont. Authority has to be able to snoop them out, even if we have to endure invasions of privacy an possible profiling issues.
I have personally dealt with a person who was a ticking time bomb. This person dated a friend of mine and it was a horrible ordeal, it took her forever to get away from him and feel safe again. (actually, it took him going to jail to get free of him) He had a long history of violence, had assaulted many past gfs (put one's head through a car windshield) and had publicly threatened the lives of many people including his own parents. (Quote: "I will kill you and cut you into a million pieces!"
Throughout this experience, I kept thinking "How did it get to this? Why hasnt anyone done something about this guy?" Despite his long list of assaults, he had no arrest record. He would threaten his victims and their families into silence. He choked and beat my friend repeatedly and she wouldnt press charges because he said he would kill her little boy and her parents. I took a long hard look at taking a hand in the matter and really hrting this scumbag myself, but then realized he would just take it out on her in retribution. I felt trapped, helpless. I even cajoled her into calling the cops onetime after he had called her and said he was coming to kill her. The officer did talk to her awhile about the situation, but there was little he could or woul;d do otherwise.
Anyway, a happy set of circumstances led to the creep geing jailed for a short time and my friend finally got away from him. I was happy for awhile. Then one day as I was at the local mall, my blood froze as I saw the creep pushing a baby carriage with a precious little girl in it. Mister scumbag spoke some threats under his breath as he passed me, but wouldnt look at me as he did so (like most bullies, a coward at heart) I thought about that for a long while. My friend was free of mister scumbag, but hadnt the real problem just been passed on to someone else? It wont surprise me if I open the paper one day and read about this guy finally killing someone. But what can I do? What can anyone do?
Uggg, my apologies for the depressing thoughts. Life goes on, hope you all have a great day.
BT is this anywhere near where you live? (you do live in colorado right)
This happened about five miles from my family's house, two days after I returned to Montana from two weeks of vacation with my family. It's not my movie theatre of choice (I go to the Movie Tavern), but I have been to it before.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If that's your first reaction to hearing your child is a suspect odds are you knew something was wrong and should have called the cops before they did anything.
To tell them what? She thinks something is up with her son? The cops won't do anything. Unless she actually knew precisely what she was planning, of which there is no evidence, the cops would have neither cause nor inclination to do anything.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
God, this is just terrible, sympathies to the victims and their families=(
On the subject of the mentally ill and guns one of the things it is important to realize is that despite the social stigma against them the vast majority of mentally ill people are not violent or dangerous AT ALL.
I do think a far greater effort needs to be made to curb the threat people with obviously violent tendencies, mentally ill or not, present however. I suppose that is a somewhat ironic statement coming from someone who was as violent as I was when I was younger but it is always both shocking and not ok at all how much brutality society actually puts up with up until the day it ends with some innocent person getting put in the ground.
In the case of the shooter who knows if there was a history of violence or any real warning signs or not but it honestly wouldn’t surprise me if he had made it clear that he was a threat to the people around him and nothing was ever done about it, that is just kind of how our society works. Sometimes it is a failure of the law, and sometimes it is just people being unwilling to use the law but either way that is often how it goes.
But the smart, quiet types are also those who tend to fly off the handle in this manner. Its not that all smart/quiet people will do this, but more often than not, it will be the spree killer's demographic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But the smart, quiet types are also those who tend to fly off the handle in this manner. Its not that all smart/quiet people will do this, but more often than not, it will be the spree killer's demographic.
I think it is more that they tend to be more "effective". Others might get angry in a bar and start a fight killing someone. But it is the quiet, smart guy that methodically plans things out, including setting up the music in his apartment to go off at the same time as the shooting and leaving his booby trapped door unlocked in the hopes that someone will go in when the music is playing and it will cause an additional incident of carnage.
To the mother's comment, I would be hesitant to read too much into it. Given how inaccurate some in the press are (see above about targeting the wrong person with a similar name), the person that said it might not even be this guy's mom. Or if it is his mom, maybe he sent his family a message/email/whatever that left a cryptic statement and they didn't find it till the morning (some people do go to bed before midnight).
As to the mental illness issue, I would agree with others. Let's not get too Orwellian here and start calling for rounding up our fellow citizens because of something that an extremely small portion of them might possibly do.
pres man, I do agree with the effectiveness argument. However, effective spree killers can be on the less intelligent side, like Charles Starkweather.
EDIT: Hadn't gotten home yet to hear about the music in his apartment. I wonder if he put thought into the playlist...
|
|
I'm a little wary of psychologists or psychiatrists being granted the extralegal ability to take away someone's rights without a trial, especially given the highly subjective nature of what they do. It might also discourage people from seeking help they need in the first place.
So have it be able to be taken before a board if you want an appeal. But if psychologist or psychiatrist doesn't think someone should have a gun, I would say they shouldn't have a gun.
We give them the authority to commit someone to an institution, but we can't give them the authority to say "That person shouldn't be armed."?
Really?
Or at least give psychologists/psychiatrists a way to recommend to the state that this person should not have a gun. That way, the case would be up for review by a secondary state psychiatrist, who could then back up the claim. But after talking to Mr. Nepherti, it seems that this may already exist on some level.
INPUT FROM MR. NEPHERTI:
When purchasing a firearm, part of the background check (at least in WV) is looking at your medical history, especially the mental health background. Any red flags should be seen in that process.
And as expected, his neighbors are saying he was
Quiet
Nerdy
Clean cut
Bookish
seemed intelligent
Kept to himselfMost killers I have read about have this description. So far no talk of a fascination with weaponry. Police stated they will enter the apt today. I want to know what they find.
Yeah, the typical interviews with the former neighbors of serial or spree killers makes me fear for the neighbors and coworkers of just about every nerd I have ever known.
Another thing to consider is the "shy, quiet" individual may also be the one repressing their emotions. Hence the reason they eventually snap.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can't prevent tragedies from happening really. If he didn't have a gun maybe he'd cook up a home made bomb. If he couldn't get that maybe he would have walked in there with a bottle of kerosene and a match. Our most enduring delusion is that we're safe, and a monstrous incident like this reminds us that our safety is entirely on a volunteer basis with our fellow humans.
The government can't prevent tragedies like this with more rules, because the people who do this don't care about the consequences.
That's why it's a tragedy, because a sad bloody end was inevitable. Something is inherently broken about this shooter (whos name I don't know and don't care to find out).
Don't let the act of one terrible person undermine your faith in the human spirit, in the empathy and kindness we show each other each day. Remember that 99.9% of us volunteer to keep each other safe every day.
Another thing to consider is the "shy, quiet" individual may also be the one repressing their emotions. Hence the reason they eventually snap.
+1
|
|
Actually you can.
Crime is actually down significantly. Many of these tragedies are prevented on a daily basis by people doing good field and police work, as well as therapists and counselors making smart decisions to protect communities.
I know, because I'm one of the people who make those decisions.
While it is very popular to discuss what the government can't do, it is so often overlooked how much better things are now, thanks to services that didn't exist.
For example, federal sex offender registries. When did they start? Take a guess, answer in spoilers
In 1994, a federal statute called the Jacob Wetterling Act required all states to pass legislation requiring sex offenders to register with state sex offender registries.
Most states have reasonable laws preventing people with serious mental illness from obtaining firearms. Unfortunately state laws don't cross borders.
This guy bought multiple guns from multiple places, all of which ran checks. If they had somewhere in the database a way to even notify any therapists who worked with him that he had purchased a gun, maybe this would not have been prevented (we don't know yet of his history) but Virginia Tech likely could have been.
Let us not make the perfect the enemy of improvement. We can't all agree that mentally ill people should have access to firearms limited in some way? Seriously?
Oh thats good to hear, Ciretose. Strides toward improvement, since perfection is not possible. I suppose I am leery of government and institutions, since so many skeletons from the first part of last century were rattled out of their closets. Though some decisions made in the old days were practical, such as sterilizing some residents of institutions due to the incidence of rape, alot of those practices definitely seem horrible and the stuff of some sort of torture dungeon today.
Its all too easy to dwell on the negative. Despite all the things to the contrary we seem to be bombarded with, humanity is slowly but surely improving. The fact that we have the luxury and freedom to even discuss higher ideals is a sign of that!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So have it be able to be taken before a board if you want an appeal.
And how does one prove sanity?
In this country you are innocent until proven guilty, particularly when there's no actual crime involved. You cannot make someone jump through what would almost certainly be multiple legal hoops (court fees, filing fees, legal fees, hiring your own expert witness, time off of work, travel expenses...) to keep a right without doing anything wrong.
But if psychologist or psychiatrist doesn't think someone should have a gun, I would say they shouldn't have a gun.
How many false positives would you get that way?
What other right should someone have to give up because a shrink says they shouldn't have it? I really don't like the fact that firearm ownership made the top ten list but its there: you can't treat it as a lesser right than the rest.
We give them the authority to commit someone to an institution, but we can't give them the authority to say "That person shouldn't be armed."?
Really?
Its a far more limited authority than people think, and more importantly as a check on the states power, its something the state has to PAY for: if the state think I'm fruitier than toucan sam they have to foot the bill for my stay. Determining people are crazy enough to be out in society but too crazy to own a gun wouldn't cost them anything: the state could use it at will for effectively no cost.