Ya ever hear the one about the insane mom who blows off the back of her son's skull to "send him to Jesus" at the shooting range? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30109090/
What would Good Friday be without a school shooting. DEARBORN, Mich. - A community college was locked down Friday because a gunman was on the campus, broadcasters reported. At least two people had been shot, according to unconfirmed reports. A woman who answered the phone in the president's office at Henry Ford Community College Friday told The Associated Press that police had secured the area but there was a gunman at the Dearborn school. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30155339/
It seems like it's amateur hour among the heavily armed lately. Those that truly believe that "Obama's gonna confiscate yer guns" are buying as many as possible and then taking out their "enemies" before the ban takes place January 1, 2010 (just kidding - keep buying as many as you like)
The NRA is. I'm a member (only because it's required by the Conservation Club I belong to), and it's shameless the amount of FUD the NRA spreads around. They are for-profit, and I have little doubt that the fear-mongering improves their bottom line. As I'm sure most of you know, I'm a firearms owner, and a "hard core" liberal. We can do better at trying to keep firearms out of the hands of those who intend to do harm. On some other forums I frequent with firearms sections, some folks (including psych students) have pointed out that our society needs to be more proactive about helping troubled citizens, and unfortunately many "right-wingers" react very violently to that ("boo hoo - the world is tough. These people are just psychotic and there's noting we can do about it, you damn commies."). We'll never be able to prevent 100% of these mass shootings. It's just not possible. But we can do better than we have. In some cases, we could do a better job of preventing people with documented issues from gaining access to firearms. In others, we could do a better job of ensuring that people having a hard time aren't neglected by the system.
Sat next to a Czech immigrant on a plane once. She said the difference between the Czech Republic and Texas was that in the Czech Republic, you have to take a test to prove that you're not crazy before you can get a gun. In Texas, the crazier you are, the more likely you are to have a gun.
Media Matters on the fueling of the hysteria, from cable TV.... [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJcPwhHGMOE"]YouTube - From Conspiracy Theories to Cable News[/ame]
Well, I have to say that I do think it should be extremely difficult to discover that information. Once you give every operator of every shooting range access to that sort of information, how do you insure that potential employers, say, or nosy neighbors for that matter won't also be privvy?
I have a solution. We already require instant background checks to buy guns (name/address/SSN are called in to the FBI, who says "yes" or "no"). For a CCL (in Ohio, anyway), you have to do a much more significant background check, which includes sending fingerprints off to the FBI. So why not modify things so that once some simple requirements are met (vis-a-vis training and being on the "good guy" list, like with a CCL), people can apply for a firearms license, which then would be used for anything dealing with firearms. No more background checks when buying a gun - just show your license. This also provides a way for private sellers to ensure that they aren't selling to people legally prohibited from buying guns (IOW, fixes the "gun show 'loophole'"). Want to go shoot at a range? Show your license. The only way to handle firearms without a license is (a) illegally, (b) under the supervision of someone else (legally responsible - allows for kids to use their parents firearms) or (c) when taking a legally recognized training program required to apply for a license. And since the FBI/BATF would be the ones issuing the licenses (via local sheriff's offices, for example), they'd be the only ones seeing the personal info of the applicants. Privacy issue resolved.
I agree, it's just too easy to have been evaluated at one time or another. Now, when you go to buy a gun, you should have to be able to swear you've never even seen a mental health clinic, and if so, exactly why and let some law enforcement officer (or whatever checks each state decides) determine whether it's for a dangerous reason or not. Or just because of "exhaustion" or something. Specific reasons why you are denied access to buy a gun should not be seen by individual gun shops, but a response of either: Sure, they're cool, sell him 6 if you want, yes, but maybe only a .22, No, please have them contact .......... with questions, or Hell no, pretend your computer just rebooted and dial 911 immediately should suffice edit: I am intrigued by the response given above by Foosinho
They already do that - at least, if you buy at a gun store (that obeys the law). You have to fill out a form, answer a bunch of questions (also recorded on the form is the gun you are wishing to purchase, including serial number), the seller calls the FBI to get the immediate answer (takes a few minutes), and then the seller files the form with the federal government so they have a record, signed by the purchaser. http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/nics/nicsindex.htm The answers are "YES", "NO', and "MAYBE", with no details as to why. If it's a MAYBE, then there is a mandatory waiting period, and if the seller has not gotten further instruction from the FBI by the end of that period, they are by default cleared to sell the weapon to the buyer. The process is the same for handguns and long guns, but the answers might be different. I don't really know all the of the firearms laws NICS checks for compliance with. Thanks, but I know many right-wing gun owners would shit-a-brick. Many already think that NICS "infringes on their rights". For example, the Columbine kids got their guns illegally, via what are called "straw purchases". One transaction was definitely a straw purchase; the other appeared to be simply an (illegal) private sale. Requiring licensing (but changing no other laws) might have prevented both transactions from happening, if just thru educating the straw purchaser and private seller of the law (and their liability) before they got licenses to purchase. Admittedly, it might not - the sellers might not have cared, even knowing how serious the offense is, or the buyers might have been able to find someone else - but since many laws are broken out of sheer ignorance, I find it hard to believe that such a "license to purchase" wouldn't have a positive effect on the problem.
BTW, when reading up on the specifics of NICS, I learned that this is already the way it works in some states. They have firearm licenses that must be shown to buy a firearm by state law (that require a NICS check to get), and BATF considers that sufficient for meeting the 1998 NICS law, provided the license is no more than 5 years old. IOW, no NICS check required at time of purchase. Add in a magnetic strip on the back with the license number encoded on it, then you can swipe the card to (a) verify it's legit, and (b) check to see if it's been revoked since it's been issued, if it hasn't already expired (to allow for changing circumstances - such as medically documented suicidal or homicidal tendencies). Or we can just do what Chris Rock suggests, and make ammo REALLY expensive.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090426/ap_on_re_us/us_deputies_shooting http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090426/ap_on_re_us/us_georgia_professor_shooting 2 more today. 2 officers in one and 3 civilians in the other. It was odd hearing on the same day about killings at two disparate places that I had been at.
Just had a new one from my neck of the woods. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jCr-8hvMxT_o93eW1whvXEAyJfqAD99SPV700 On Tuesday night, the gunman {George Sodini}walked into the fitness center, entered a "Latin impact" dance aerobics class and placed a duffel bag on the ground. After pausing a few moments, he took at least two guns out of the bag and started shooting. Three women were killed and nine people were injured. Police say he may have fired as many as 52 shots before turning the gun on himself and committing suicide. "He walked right into the room where the shootings occurred as if he knew exactly where he was going," Allegheny County police Superintendent Charles Moffatt said. "I think he went in with the idea of doing what he did." Authorities on Wednesday identified the gunman as Sodini, of nearby Scott Township. The three women who died were Heidi Overmier, 46, of Carnegie; Elizabeth Gannon, 49, of Pittsburgh; and Jody Billingsley, 38, of Mount Lebanon.
Time to start carrying concealed to Latin dance (I had assumed this shooting would be linked to an anti-immigration nut). For those who don't read a lot of blogs, this pathetic asshole is getting a fair amount of sympathy from some pathetic asshole hetero male groups, who think that the modern emancipation of women is at fault because it leaves hot stuff like this creep celibate and lonely. He also appears to have been an anti-Obama racist, but obviously much more committed to his misogyny.
This might be a very naive question, but how is this kind of behavior not picked up on much earlier, long before these people go on their murderous rampages?
Well, you might hate me for passing these along, but: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jysj6bqCvLg&feature=related"]George Sodini Home Video #1[/ame] [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCIT6h03fKA&feature=related"]George Sodini Home Video #2[/ame] These videos give a clue at how tightly-wound the guy was; also, how devoid of personality and empathy. Clearly a sociopath, IMHO. Video #2--the tour of his house--is seemingly banal and without interest, until you note just how COMPLETELY banal and without character his home is. This has been his bachelor pad for almost two decades, and there's nothing on the walls, no clutter, nothing to suggest that an actual person with any personal interest occupies the space. His house was almost hotel-like, although most hotels would at least hang a picture or two.
I don't know, looking at the videos bigred posted and the blog excerpt, I can't see how this person could have functioned in a way that wouldn't have raised numerous red flags with the few people he interacted with, be it at work on in his neighborhood.