One week ago today

One week ago, 7 people were killed and 30 people were injured by a dumbf**k who should have been kept from buying guns.

The Police were at this idiot's house 3 years ago when he told people he was 'going to kill everyone'. The Police confiscated his knifes and turned it over to the State Police.

But no one pressed charges.

He was never arrested and never kept from getting guns.

Think really hard about that if you ever stick up for someone. Especially someone you don't know.

Because those people might not be dead and injured if that moron was kept from getting guns.

It doesn't matter who they are, a friend, relative, or a stranger, if they are rich or poor, or what color they are - if they do something because you did nothing, you helped them do it.

Don't blame people who own guns who didn't do anything wrong.

Blame the people who did nothing when they should have had the dimwit locked up - either in jail or in an institution - 3 YEARS AGO.

THEY are the reason this happened.

According to Joe this happened in 1918 though.
Did the White House even correct him.

Link to 1918

nypost.com...

Highland Park, IL is where the shooting was last week.

originally posted by: burntheships
According to Joe this happened in 1918 though.
Did the White House even correct him.

Link to 1918

nypost.com...

That was Parkland, FL.

a reply to: CryHavoc

Without knowing all of the details when he said he's "going to kill everyone.", I cannot agree with you that something should/could have been done to stop this from happening. As far as I can tell, he made a random statement 3 years ago and you think he should have been arrested for it, and still been in jail?

I'm just asking for more details.

I think the problem is how do you really identify a person like this out of 330 million if they never been arrested, whatever he did prior to 18 is sealed, and we do not want to have some kind of thought police ruling over everyone.

I don't know the answer, but it is easy to look in the past and pick everything that was wrong, but it is basically impossible to look into the future. In aviation safety there is something called the swiss cheese model where if you think of an accident there are many holes in the cheese that all need to align up for the accident to happen, and if you remove one hole the accident never happens, so how does society see the holes to remove even one to stop something like this.

Also, how do we know we are not already 99.9% successful in preventing this to happen since all it takes is 1 in 330 million for a failure rate.

I wonder if he did not have a gun, would he have just ran them down with his mother's car? It has been done several times before.

When someone really thanks they need to do something, they will find a way to do it. No matter what it is and whether or not it makes any sense to anyone else.

Yes, the videos and other history should have raised some suspicions but that is in hindsight. He could have been just an excentric artest type.

The coverage of these shootings are focused on much like a plane crash. They really have no comparison of all the times nothing bad happens. While they are tragic, they are still very, very rare to occure. For the most part, society is doing it right.

The problem is people sometimes fail. They sometimes fail to see problems right in front of them. They sometimes fail to seek help. They sometimes go nuts. You cannot eliminate all of these possible failures no matter what you do.

a reply to: Xtrozero

perhaps asking a few questions first.

1. has the police ever had a reason to interact with this kid?

2. if yes, what about?

3. if yes, how many times?

4. is this kid a danger to himself or others based on the above answers?

If 4 is a "yes" then at the very least, this kid needs to be on a list of "no, he cannot legally buy a weapon". Currently, if you do not have a CCW (at least in NC), you have to fill out the FFL form and your information is checked with the state. In this case, there should have been a notation that this kid isn't able to buy a gun.

That one action may have saved lives.

And if we need to enact new laws, then we can look at what process is needed to re-evaluate this kid a few years down the road, if he wants to buy a weapon then.

But why even have a system to check who can buy and who can't, if we are going to let things like this go?

originally posted by: network dude

4. is this kid a danger to himself or others based on the above answers?

We are talking 172 mass shootings in the last 60 years, so actually really rare and that is why it is so hard to identify possible shooters. As horrendous as one is we are talking about 1200 people killed in 60 years, but how today can we cut that down some.

How do you determine this if there is no serious "known" situation[s] to trigger this question. I do agree that over 60% have been arrested and over 60% showed a history of violence, but that by itself can be a slippery slope. Close to 50% told people ahead of time what they would do, so there is a really good point, but once again mass shootings are extremely rare overall, so people generally do not think about it or put two and two together.

One of my key points is in the school shootings 80% stole guns from family members and that means no safe even though the families knew the person had issues. I have a lot of guns and all where in a safe to include the ammo where my 2 boys had zero access with out me. I had a pistol in a finger print lock box in my bedroom until they were past 18. Today not so much worried about it all but all are still in my safe except for a couple of handguns.

I think we can start with gun security, the Columbine shooters would take their dad's guns into the woods and shoot them, build pipe bombs in their garage, all without his knowing WTF! Putting people maybe on a no gun list if they trigger X number of events, but that one is kind of hard. At least start there...

a reply to: CryHavoc

Apologies, I'd blame google but I should have
been more careful.