07-14-2014 07:46 AM
4,617 ... 173174175176177 ...
tools
  1. palandri's Avatar
    It looks like the original video was removed, so I can't see when it was posted to YouTube. Looks like the day before.

    Next question....who's going to watch for all these sorts of videos to pop on YouTube and be responsible for vetting them all within 24 hours? There's more to what you're saying than you've considered.

    The biggest thing is "well, one person did it, so now we have to check everyone else too". Where is the line?
    Good question.

    I am guessing now since I am not a mental health professional, but I am betting there were a lot of red flags that a mental health professional could point out. I am sure we'll hear from a few of them over the next couple of days.
    05-24-2014 08:21 PM
  2. Mooncatt's Avatar
    The AP was reporting earlier that the shooter's parents had already reported him to the police about alarming behavior before this happened. I'm also currently listening to the press conference and they said the police did make a welfare check on the shooter before (not sure if related to the parental concerns, or a separate case) but he didn't meet the requirements for involuntary mental health restraint/evaluation. He has apparently had some prior mental evaluations.

    I don't remember all the exact numbers, but I think they said he had 3 pistols, and a lot of 10 round magazines full. After it was over, he still had over 400 rounds ready to go. All guns and ammo was confirmed legally obtained and registered.

    So the argument could be made both ways. Pro-gun advocates could say that all the regulations on the books aren't stopping these shootings, so we need less regulations so law abiding people can have better access and ability to defend themselves. Anti-gun advocates could say the government hasn't gone far enough. So go lock horns everybody.
    05-24-2014 08:21 PM
  3. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    Considering we have a large group of people that refuse to have a grown up conversation on the issue of gun violence in our society, do we really want to establish a line that says, "this many deaths are acceptable"? Trust me, I think that people should be allowed to defend themselves, their loved ones, and their homes from people that mean to do them harm, but the paranoia coming from one camp that insists that the government is trying to slowly disarm them and then overnight lock them up and throw away the key is the definition of insanity (And I don't mean the workout videos).

    The 2nd amendment is another example of how we've let go of the wheel on logic. Instead of discussing it with critical thinking, we're all "2nd amendment don't tread on me, go murica!"

    Look at the 2nd amendment as it was written by the framers:



    Now from what I hear, from those on the right, is that the 2nd amendment is necessary if we ever need to overthrow this government. Now this argument would be plausible if we still lived in the age of muskets and cannons. The government is way past muskets and cannons. The time for adult conversation on this is way past overdue. Yes the constitution is the road map of our great nation, but every great nation finds a way to adapt. Even christians have adapted, our society doesn't stone people to death anymore for the act of infidelity.
    Well, I was more referencing the 1st Amendment since the question was basically "at what point does what a person say warrant the type of investigation you mentioned?"

    Maybe I worded it poorly. If so, my apologies.

    Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
    05-24-2014 08:24 PM
  4. Mooncatt's Avatar
    Good question.

    I am guessing now since I am not a mental health professional, but I am betting there were a lot of red flags that a mental health professional could point out. I am sure we'll hear from a few of them over the next couple of days.
    The problem with this is even the mentally insane could do a great job hiding their plans to kill, and those red flags wouldn't seem like red flags until after the fact.
    Kevin OQuinn likes this.
    05-24-2014 08:26 PM
  5. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    Good question.

    I am guessing now since I am not a mental health professional, but I am betting there were a lot of red flags that a mental health professional could point out. I am sure we'll hear from a few of them over the next couple of days.
    So....everybody needs to be watched and/or evaluated for possible mental health issues?

    We've yet to establish any sort of response time for this monitoring. 24 hours to catch any and all possible "imminent threat" videos posted on various video sharing sites?

    I'm obviously being over the top a bit.

    If this happens to be a case where "everything possible was done" then what? We're back to "the system is broken".

    Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
    05-24-2014 08:29 PM
  6. palandri's Avatar
    So....everybody needs to be watched and/or evaluated for possible mental health issues?

    We've yet to establish any sort of response time for this monitoring. 24 hours to catch any and all possible "imminent threat" videos posted on various video sharing sites?

    I'm obviously being over the top a bit.

    If this happens to be a case where "everything possible was done" then what? We're back to "the system is broken".

    Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
    I am just saying, and I am seeing now on a CNN discussion, that mental health professional will be able to point out obvious red flags which we need to learn from and adopt. Nobody wants a mentally unstable person to be able to purchase a gun.
    05-24-2014 08:54 PM
  7. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    I'll just go ahead and say it. I'm not sure it's possible for us to completely eliminate the possibility that these types of things will happen. Everybody knows it, but I'm not sure anybody has actually said it.
    jdbii likes this.
    05-24-2014 08:57 PM
  8. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    I am just saying, and I am seeing now on a CNN discussion, that mental health professional will be able to point out obvious red flags which we need to learn from and adopt. Nobody wants a mentally unstable person to be able to purchase a gun.
    But we can't have a bunch of armchair mental health professionals saying people aren't fit for gun ownership either.
    jdbii likes this.
    05-24-2014 08:58 PM
  9. palandri's Avatar
    But we can't have a bunch of armchair mental health professionals saying people aren't fit for gun ownership either.
    Are you saying we're doomed? I just heard he's had three mental health evaluations and I can see clearly see the first red flag there. Even the most hardcore NRA member would say wait a minute. I am sure more red flags will be pointed out over the next few days.
    05-24-2014 09:21 PM
  10. Mooncatt's Avatar
    Are you saying we're doomed? I just heard he's had three mental health evaluations and I can see clearly see the first red flag there. Even the most hardcore NRA member would say wait a minute. I am sure more red flags will be pointed out over the next few days.
    Are you saying the three evaluations are a red flag itself, or are you questioning the quality of the counselor(s)? If a counselor has reason to believe you are thinking about harming yourself or others, the privacy rules allow, and they are legally required to report you to the authorities.
    05-24-2014 09:41 PM
  11. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    I am just saying, and I am seeing now on a CNN discussion, that mental health professional will be able to point out obvious red flags which we need to learn from and adopt. Nobody wants a mentally unstable person to be able to purchase a gun.
    Are you saying we're doomed? I just heard he's had three mental health evaluations and I can see clearly see the first red flag there. Even the most hardcore NRA member would say wait a minute. I am sure more red flags will be pointed out over the next few days.
    Based on what you said I inferred that people looking to own firearms should have a mental evaluation to look for red flags. The only people qualified to do that are those that have certification for it. So, logical deduction based on that says that only mental health professionals should sell firearms.

    That would also mean that anyone that could have potential access to those firearms would need to be evaluated by that (or a) professional as well.

    And no, not saying we're doomed. Thinking we can prevent every single mass murder/shooting/killer rampage is probably just unrealistic. We can't have total prevention and still enjoy all of the freedoms that we want to enjoy at the same time.

    There have been MANY discussions on this already, and nobody has proposed anything that could retain the rights everyone wants while also guaranteeing there will be no more incidents like this.

    But, the question then becomes....why are we only concerned with preventing multiple casualty incidents and not individual murders? Are those individual lives not worth as much just because someone else didn't get killed with them? (pretty sure I already know what the answer to that is going to be)

    Next line of thinking then becomes....how do we prevent all murder? And guarantee that prevention? Ban all weapons? What qualifies as a weapon versus tool, or kitchen utensil, or anything else?

    The answer seems to be that there is no answer.
    jdbii likes this.
    05-24-2014 09:51 PM
  12. palandri's Avatar
    Based on what you said I inferred that people looking to own firearms should have a mental evaluation to look for red flags. The only people qualified to do that are those that have certification for it. So, logical deduction based on that says that only mental health professionals should sell firearms.

    That would also mean that anyone that could have potential access to those firearms would need to be evaluated by that (or a) professional as well.

    And no, not saying we're doomed. Thinking we can prevent every single mass murder/shooting/killer rampage is probably just unrealistic. We can't have total prevention and still enjoy all of the freedoms that we want to enjoy at the same time.

    There have been MANY discussions on this already, and nobody has proposed anything that could retain the rights everyone wants while also guaranteeing there will be no more incidents like this.

    But, the question then becomes....why are we only concerned with preventing multiple casualty incidents and not individual murders? Are those individual lives not worth as much just because someone else didn't get killed with them? (pretty sure I already know what the answer to that is going to be)

    Next line of thinking then becomes....how do we prevent all murder? And guarantee that prevention? Ban all weapons? What qualifies as a weapon versus tool, or kitchen utensil, or anything else?

    The answer seems to be that there is no answer.
    I understand what you're saying and it makes sense, but the less we strive for perfection, the further away we are from it.
    05-24-2014 09:58 PM
  13. palandri's Avatar
    Are you saying the three evaluations are a red flag itself, or are you questioning the quality of the counselor(s)? If a counselor has reason to believe you are thinking about harming yourself or others, the privacy rules allow, and they are legally required to report you to the authorities.
    We don't have enough information at this point to draw any conclusions. We need to wait and see what else surfaces. Maybe next we'll find out next he was treated for bipolar disorder and was on drugs X, Y and Z. Once we have all the fact, then we can try to put it all together and hopefully stop it in the future.
    05-24-2014 10:13 PM
  14. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    I understand what you're saying and it makes sense, but the less we strive for perfection, the further away we are from it.
    It's pretty clear that as a society our morality towards taking the life of another human just isn't there yet. At least not at the basic level of "it's just not something you do, EVER"
    05-24-2014 10:19 PM
  15. Mooncatt's Avatar
    We don't have enough information at this point to draw any conclusions. We need to wait and see what else surfaces. Maybe next we'll find out next he was treated for bipolar disorder and was on drugs X, Y and Z. Once we have all the fact, then we can try to put it all together and hopefully stop it in the future.
    That's all well and good, but you said you saw red flags. If the red flags were there, then at least one of those counsellors should have reported him. Since that's not the case (at least not reported so far), then either there wasn't, or you're privy to some information no one else is. I think it's safe to say the latter isn't true, so I'm going with the former. Yes, having former counseling could be a yellow flag, but we can't automatically assume that alone is enough to say someone shouldn't have a fire arm. Especially if none of the counsellors reported him.

    Now if it comes out that a counselor did report him to authorities, then we can discuss what went wrong where.
    05-24-2014 11:48 PM
  16. palandri's Avatar
    That's all well and good, but you said you saw red flags. If the red flags were there, then at least one of those counsellors should have reported him. Since that's not the case (at least not reported so far), then either there wasn't, or you're privy to some information no one else is. I think it's safe to say the latter isn't true, so I'm going with the former. Yes, having former counseling could be a yellow flag, but we can't automatically assume that alone is enough to say someone shouldn't have a fire arm. Especially if none of the counsellors reported him.

    Now if it comes out that a counselor did report him to authorities, then we can discuss what went wrong where.
    You're wrong. I never said that. Go back and reread what I posted. I never said I saw red flags with an "S".
    05-25-2014 12:42 AM
  17. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    So he started by stabbing people.

    Rodger's Murderous Rampage Began At Home | News - KEYT

    Now we have to ban knives.
    05-25-2014 12:51 AM
  18. palandri's Avatar
    So he started by stabbing people.

    Rodger's Murderous Rampage Began At Home | News - KEYT

    Now we have to ban knives.
    Why would you say that?
    05-25-2014 12:52 AM
  19. Mooncatt's Avatar
    You're wrong. I never said that. Go back and reread what I posted. I never said I saw red flags with an "S".
    I did address that in my initial reply to this, when I asked if it was simply going to 3 counsellors that was the flag. A red flag would mean he shouldn't have been allowed to get a fire arm.

    Let me rephrase then. If simply going to three counsellors was a red flag, don't you think that third counselor would have reported him? It still comes back to not being that he went, but what happened in those sessions. So for you to claim that, are we to assume you know something no one else does?
    05-25-2014 01:05 AM
  20. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    Why would you say that?
    He also ran someone over. Cars are also on the chopping block.
    05-25-2014 01:05 AM
  21. NoYankees44's Avatar
    3 step plan to "stopping" mass murders.

    1. Accept that you will never completely stop mass murders or murders in general. Completely forget that notion.

    2. Stop glorifying mass murders and giving them so much attention. Part of the reason many of these sick individuals do what they do is because they know they will get a large amount of attention. Stop giving mass shooting such national attention, and you will also take it away as a common talking point for society. So the crazies that are on the edge of going crazy may not think to go to a gun free movie theater during a blockbuster release with full swat gear on. They may even not think to resort to murder at all.

    3. Address societal issues. Break down of the family unit, no or terrible parenting, general anger and violence, and general lack of any intelligible for of a moral compass are all root causes to mass shootings and murder in general. Fix them.

    Instead of focusing on the objects people murder each other with, we should be focusing on why people murder at all. It's like taking away a fork from someone that is overweight instead of actually figuring out why they are overweight.
    rexxman, plumbrich and bradleyem like this.
    05-25-2014 10:26 PM
  22. Kilroy13's Avatar
    Were animals! Animals kill each other!

    SENT FROM MY LG G-FLEX ON SPRINT........LIFE IS GOOD✌
    05-25-2014 10:45 PM
  23. anon8126715's Avatar
    Well, I was more referencing the 1st Amendment since the question was basically "at what point does what a person say warrant the type of investigation you mentioned?"

    Maybe I worded it poorly. If so, my apologies.

    Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
    Trust me, I would rather not give up more freedoms than we already have since 9/11. But the fact that we can't have a serious adult conversation about gun laws. The only alternatives I see are we continue to accept all the senseless violence or we report every single possibility to the authorities and let them violate our right to due process in the name of appeasing gun nuts.

    I still find it incomprehensible that the majority of Americans are in favor of new gun legislation, but we have these special interest groups (NRA, Tea baggers, etc) that have hijacked our democratic process. If the Democrats had any competence about them, they'd take this issue to the streets and harness that majority in November. When you have polls that tell you a majority are behind a cause that is counter-culture to your opponent, why would you run away from it?
    05-26-2014 07:29 AM
  24. anon8126715's Avatar
    Based on what you said I inferred that people looking to own firearms should have a mental evaluation to look for red flags. The only people qualified to do that are those that have certification for it. So, logical deduction based on that says that only mental health professionals should sell firearms.

    That would also mean that anyone that could have potential access to those firearms would need to be evaluated by that (or a) professional as well.

    And no, not saying we're doomed. Thinking we can prevent every single mass murder/shooting/killer rampage is probably just unrealistic. We can't have total prevention and still enjoy all of the freedoms that we want to enjoy at the same time.

    There have been MANY discussions on this already, and nobody has proposed anything that could retain the rights everyone wants while also guaranteeing there will be no more incidents like this.

    But, the question then becomes....why are we only concerned with preventing multiple casualty incidents and not individual murders? Are those individual lives not worth as much just because someone else didn't get killed with them? (pretty sure I already know what the answer to that is going to be)

    Next line of thinking then becomes....how do we prevent all murder? And guarantee that prevention? Ban all weapons? What qualifies as a weapon versus tool, or kitchen utensil, or anything else?

    The answer seems to be that there is no answer.
    There are obvious answers to me, but the paranoid sector of our society would see it as some sort of "Obama master plan to take over 'Murica". You go in to purchase a weapon. You fill out some paperwork based on the nature of the weapon you intend to buy. Assault rifle: "Please describe your reason for wanting to purchase this style of firearm. A) For hunting B) For personal use C) For business use D) For home protection E) To help ensure my Muslim non-US born President does not release his Muslim brotherhood against all that is good and decent in this country"

    Now I will admit to having interjected my own brand of sarcasm, but when applying for work, I've filled out some rather invasive questionnaires, thus I'm not sure why one should be immune from such questioning when it comes to gun ownership. All one needs to do is generate a set of questions designed to gauge why someone is wanting to purchase a certain firearm or high capacity clip. We don't even have to apply it to everything. A .38 special doesn't pose as big a threat as a high powered assault rifle so the questioning shouldn't be as intensive. But for some reason we can't even have a discussion on screenings. What strikes me as interesting about the discussion is some of the loudest screamers against any forms of gun law reform seem to exhibit a form of paranoia that borders on psychosis behavior, not exactly the kind of mental condition I think deserves a place at the table for discussions on such a matter. We might as well let the arsonist be in charge of the matches at a camp out.
    05-26-2014 07:50 AM
  25. palandri's Avatar
    I think it's too easy to get guns, which makes mass murder easier. Sad, but true, at this point nothing is going to change even if the majority of people want the change because the NRA has the money to stop it.

    The argument of protection from a rogue government, just doesn't make a lot of sense anymore. If we truly had a crazy rogue government, all the militias could stand there with their AR15 protecting their property, while a battleship 200 miles off the coast of the U.S. fires a cruise missile and turns the militias to dust... or they bring in a M1A2 Abrams tank. An AR15 is like a BB gun to a M1A2 Abrams tank ...or they bring in drones.

    Like i said, it's just too easy to get guns.
    05-26-2014 08:45 AM
4,617 ... 173174175176177 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Larva Cartoon - FREE and FUNNY Application
    By liontyping in forum Android Apps
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-21-2014, 11:03 AM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-25-2013, 07:33 AM
  3. POI information and Gallery
    By robjulo in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 11:00 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 04:28 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD