misguided blame

[wesw]

I m no fan of the NRA, though I recognize that they have stood strong against bad ideas.

wayne la peter is a real card.....

but...

but it was not the NRA who failed our children

it was, first, the kids themselves who did not take to the streets in protest of the nutjob that they knew was among them.

we can forgive them, certainly , they are children.

but they were failed by the teachers first. the teachers did not take to the streets against the malign character in their midst.

they were failed by the admin, who ignored the warnings of the students and teachers.

they were failed by the govt ant educators and the law enforcement who agreed to ignore violent youth and agreed to avoid arresting dangerous kids.

they were failed by the sheriff s dept and the useless SRO s ...

a few yrs ago there was a wonderful stae policeman who was at our local high school...., I have no doubt that he would have died for the kids there....

...now they have a fat useless SRO who loves power and donuts.....

and they were failed by the FBI, who, like the sheriff s in broward, had ample warning.

....and the poor distraught naïve and misled children were guided to vent their anger and grief against shiney, shiney squirrels.

and the pied pipers pipe on.....

[RayThom]

... they were failed by the sheriff s dept and the useless SRO s ... now they have a fat useless SRO who loves power and donuts... and they were failed by the FBI, who, like the sheriff s in broward, had ample warning...

The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School SRO:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/deputy-sco ... deo-shows/

[ex-khobar Andy]

It's easy to say that there were warnings and signs that this man was a total fuckup. But AFAIK he had been found guilty of no crime. Under current gun regulations (or lack thereof) could the feds or the local police actually have prevented him from obtaining these weapons and ammunition?

Edited to answer my own question. It appears that he could have been accused of, for example, aggravated cyberstalking. Just the accusation might have been enough to relieve him of his weapons. http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/c ... 87629.html

[BoSoxGal]

I think if the average citizen understood how many people like Cruz there are in every jurisdiction, they'd understand why the solution is tighter gun control, and not pointing fingers at allegedly negligent educators, social workers or sheriff's deputies, or the FBI.

There are many, many very troubled teens and adults all around you, those of us who work in law enforcement know this all too well. The gun control laws are so lax in so many jurisdictions that people who are on the edge of cracking but haven't committed a crime that currently justifies removal of weapons are plentiful.

I will also tell you from my own experience (many, many times over) that even people who DO commit crimes that justify removal of weapons - either pre- or post-conviction - often do not comply with the court's order of firearm removal. They often hide their weapons with family or friends, well-meaning people like the folks who fostered Cruz who don't think the person is a danger even though others, including LEOs, do. I've seen it time and again - that's why the US Attorney's offices nationwide prosecute and convict so many people on weapons charges, many of them being felons or domestic abusers who possess firearms in violation of terms or probation or permanent bans linked to DV convictions.

I was always diligent about trying to get firearms away from abusers in particular, because I once worked closely with a woman when I was a DV advocate whose husband blew her brains out, then his own, with a shotgun he possessed in violation of a protective order issued by a Massachusetts court - and he did it in front of their 12 year old daughter, ruining her life as well. I've never forgotten Dorothy, and I never, ever will.

[Darren]

It's easy to say that there were warnings and signs that this man was a total fuckup. But AFAIK he had been found guilty of no crime. Under current gun regulations (or lack thereof) could the feds or the local police actually have prevented him from obtaining these weapons and ammunition?

Edited to answer my own question. It appears that he could have been accused of, for example, aggravated cyberstalking. Just the accusation might have been enough to relieve him of his weapons. http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/c ... 87629.html

Unless the legal definition of assault (a verbal threat) has changed, Cruz would have been subject to adjudication if investigated properly. Investigating officers or the FBI would have conducted a search and taken at least his computer, phone and rifle. A judge could have ordered a psyche evaluation. Given Cruz has all the earmarks of adoption syndrome, his legal access to firearms in the future would be terminated if the feds properly updated NCIS.

[Big RR]

Darren--I am not sure, but I do not think that "adopted child syndrome" is a generally accepted mental illness; I do know it is not part of the DSM. Absent that, I would think more would be needed to terminate access to firearms (I am unsure if any of the crimes he might have been accused of would be sufficient in Florida).

[ex-khobar Andy]

Per Darren:

Unless the legal definition of assault (a verbal threat) has changed, Cruz would have been subject to adjudication if investigated properly. Investigating officers or the FBI would have conducted a search and taken at least his computer, phone and rifle. A judge could have ordered a psyche evaluation. Given Cruz has all the earmarks of adoption syndrome, his legal access to firearms in the future would be terminated if the feds properly updated NCIS.

I'm lost here.

AFAIK the 'legal definition of assault' does not include threats but it varies by state.

Adoption syndrome - not accepted by American Psychiatric Association which is the de facto ruling body on this sort of thing.

NCIS = Naval Criminal Investigative Service so I don't know what that has to do with anything.

Regardless of the details, I assume that your basic point is that, given the threatening nature of his actions and his social media posts, someone (feds? local sheriff?) could have conducted some sort of search and ordered a psychiatric evaluation which might have resulted in a termination of his legal access to firearms. I bet that all takes a while. And I bet that there are a significant number of 14-year-old crazies in their basements who think it amusing to make threats which, of course, they will never act on but which sufficiently muddy the water so that the really loopy ones remain hidden. And my guess is that some of these people who are a danger to others are not, in any technical, legal or clinical sense, bonkers but quite rational. Psychopaths have the appearance of rationality and being within (wide) societal norms and may give no clue beyond 'He was always a bit odd' before they do something permanent.

[Scooter]

It is telling that the title of this thread is "misguided blame", and then who does the OP blame "first" of all for school shootings - the students, i.e. the victims.

Really says it all about the gun nut mentality that is preventing any substantive change to protect people from being used for target practice.

[Big RR]

NCIS = Naval Criminal Investigative Service so I don't know what that has to do with anything.

Andy--I think he meant the background checking system NICS, but my understanding of that is that it contains only things judicially decided--from criminal convictions, to mentally ill adjudications, to entry of domestic violence protective orders, so I don't think anything here would have made a difference.

[Burning Petard]

There IS Florida law that could have applied and interrupted the events that ended with 17 dead.

Florida has a system that allows a single individual to report that a person is dangerous and has guns. That sets up a process to sieze the guns immediately from that person and then a process of legal/psychological review to determine if the guns should be returned. It can even be initiated by a person who is not in Florida.

This is all from my badly remembered news media accounts of a Florida dweller sending information to the out of state family of his unliked neighbor that led the family to file the proper notice that started this process.

Any legal experts from Florida who can confirm or deny or clarify?

Snailgate.

[Scooter]

I don't profess to be any sort of expert, but anything that would seize firearms based on nothing but a report, before any investigation, would seem to be a gross violation of due process.

[BoSoxGal]

Yup; I’m gonna call bullshit on that assertion until a Florida code citation is provided for this alleged firearms removal law.

This is, after all, a state with a very strong ‘stand your ground’ law, very little gun regulation, and home to one of the NRA’s most powerful lobbyists in the country:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newyor ... licies/amp

I don’t believe for a second that they take lawfully owned guns away from citizens based on the report of one accuser and without any adjudication.

[Sue U]

The obvious problem that no one is willing to address is, as I keep repeating, too many guns too readily available to too many people. Until you reduce the sheer number of guns in circulation and impose tighter restrictions on their ownership, you will continue to have a severe gun violence problem, including mass shootings. Everything that is not directly addressing that goal is a deflection and distraction.

[MajGenl.Meade]

I find myself agreeing with Sue.... which should worry her even more

[Burning Petard]

Sue U, I have addressed this in several dead-horse dialogues.

"sheer number of guns in circulation and impose tighter restrictions on their ownership,"

Your argument is based on one slice of time--now. Guns are a very durable good. I have a rifle that is still safely functional with current factory ammo after manufacture in 1895. Many firearms made during the American Civil war are still functional. More than quarter-century ago there were home machinists making beautiful miniatures of the Gatling gun that fired .22 long rifle, and were completely legal under federal regs at that time. Thank whatever deity you prefer that fad has ended.

The availability of guns has been reduced over time, when you consider the federal and state gun regulations over decades. Tighter restrains on their ownership' has been imposed. Yet the number of wrongful deaths has also increased over the same time. Regulating guns is the EASY target, when the problem is very complex and there is no single point solution and there is so little data on what works. International comparisons have very fuzzy controls for important variables.

If you must begin at a single point, I suggest tight regulation of AMMO, not guns. Ammo is very tricky to make with raw materials commonly available. The 'choke point' is the little metal pill that absorbs the mechanical force and converts it to a chemical reaction that produces the expanding gas that drives the projectile out of the gun. Dry up sources for that, along with extreme regulation of the sale of factory assembled ammo and it would have a much faster results, compared to efforts to reduce the sheer number of guns. The AR-15 would become a wall decoration, just like 6 gauge shotgun used as a punt gun by market hunters of waterfowl here in the Delaware and Chesapeake Bays at the turn of the 19/20th century.

snailgate.

[Darren]

I don't profess to be any sort of expert, but anything that would seize firearms based on nothing but a report, before any investigation, would seem to be a gross violation of due process.

Seizing evidence based on a complaint is not a violation of due process. Cruz made threats. Did he have the means to carry them out. Yes. He had purchased a rifle. He should have been taken before a judge.

[Darren]

Sue U, I have addressed this in several dead-horse dialogues.

"sheer number of guns in circulation and impose tighter restrictions on their ownership,"

Your argument is based on one slice of time--now. Guns are a very durable good. I have a rifle that is still safely functional with current factory ammo after manufacture in 1895. Many firearms made during the American Civil war are still functional. More than quarter-century ago there were home machinists making beautiful miniatures of the Gatling gun that fired .22 long rifle, and were completely legal under federal regs at that time. Thank whatever deity you prefer that fad has ended.

The availability of guns has been reduced over time, when you consider the federal and state gun regulations over decades. Tighter restrains on their ownership' has been imposed. Yet the number of wrongful deaths has also increased over the same time. Regulating guns is the EASY target, when the problem is very complex and there is no single point solution and there is so little data on what works. International comparisons have very fuzzy controls for important variables.

If you must begin at a single point, I suggest tight regulation of AMMO, not guns. Ammo is very tricky to make with raw materials commonly available. The 'choke point' is the little metal pill that absorbs the mechanical force and converts it to a chemical reaction that produces the expanding gas that drives the projectile out of the gun. Dry up sources for that, along with extreme regulation of the sale of factory assembled ammo and it would have a much faster results, compared to efforts to reduce the sheer number of guns. The AR-15 would become a wall decoration, just like 6 gauge shotgun used as a punt gun by market hunters of waterfowl here in the Delaware and Chesapeake Bays at the turn of the 19/20th century.

snailgate.

I just sold reloaders I purchased about twenty years ago. I never used them. They were designed as commercial equipment. New they sold for $3,000 thirty years ago. In the course of selling them I got a small glimpse of ammo reloading in this country. Suffice to say it would probably take decades to impact the hard core reloaders. Any restrictions on ammo would create another illegal underground economy like that for drugs while criminalizing otherwise innocent individuals. Prohibition failed and provided the cash flow for the growth of organized crime. Likewise the war of drugs has failed while enriching those with no concern for society and corrupting those that can be convinced to look the other way.

I'll leave you with the thought that Trump carried more states than Clinton. That doesn't bode well for gun or ammo control. Ammo control is DOA on the federal level and in most states. Wishing and hoping isn't a solution.

[Burning Petard]

Are reloaders hoarding primers? That is the component that is most difficult to create from scratch. There was panic among handleaders about 10 years ago when the supply of primers nearly dried up as the makers of factory cartridges ramped up their own production.

Underground economy? Perhaps from China or similar source. Primers are much more difficult to make than bathtub gin, crystal meth, or even animal tranquilizers, or designer drugs. I refer you to just how many problems have occurred to modern makers of controlled explosives for auto airbags.

The major drivers for hand loading as I understand it is to save money because real marksmanship requires burning ups lots of ammo in practice, and careful workmanship can produce cheaper and more accurate ammo than the factory stuff. Once fired in a gun, the used brass fits that particular gun better than the stuff in the store. I know some bench rest shooters that even carefully observe the maker's name on the end of the brass, so it is always inserted in the chamber in the same position and in the same position in the neck forming die. Making your own ammo requires nearly infinite attention to detail both to get good results and to prevent a disastrous blowup in the gun.

Ammo control may be dead politically, but reducing the number of guns in private hands is even deader.

How'bout some discussion on things that will work rather what won't.

snailgate.

[Darren]

Are reloaders hoarding primers?

How'bout some discussion on things that will work rather what won't.

snailgate.

I can't speak for reloaders as a group. Personally I could put my hands on thousands, both rifle and pistol, without paperwork.

As for what would work, there are three incidents that provide insight. Those are the Florida school shooting, the debacle in the Air Forces handling of a court marshal's outcome and the discrepancy, if true, between the ATF's and the FBI's definition of fugitive. Those were system failures.

Mental health, HIPAA and NCIS is another as far as accountability.

[Darren]

Darren--I am not sure, but I do not think that "adopted child syndrome" is a generally accepted mental illness; I do know it is not part of the DSM. Absent that, I would think more would be needed to terminate access to firearms (I am unsure if any of the crimes he might have been accused of would be sufficient in Florida).

I don't accept the DSM as authoritative. Wasn't homosexuality once regarded as mental illness? Likewise the range of autism wasn't known until recently when the past guidelines of a medical doctor were discredited. Many were denied care due to his arrogance and narrow vision. Adoption syndrome is real. I have personal experience of children that had exemplary behavior until they learned of their adoption. After that all hell broke loose in a manner of speaking. They became sociopaths unable to accept reality.