7 Dead in Santa Barbara Shooting

[gene]

We are kidding ourselves by thinking that these events are going to stimulate the real crazies from getting guns. Criminals get them by the boatload, drug dealers get them as needed, people that are knowing deranged get them and then the fingers begin to point. People that can't buy them often times make their own zip guns.

If they continue with their goals to disarm stable law abiding citizens, it's a sure bet the same criminals and unstable people will still get anything they desire and you and your families will be defenseless and forced into some savage law that prevents any form of self defense against the same people that they should be locking up in the first place.

Look at Europe and that's what you can expect as things are going! Politicians as a whole are knowing ignorant and sheltered and to a large degree incompetent and corrupt.

Our politicians have given free rein and passes to the criminals, the drug dealers, rapist, murderers, Ex cons and illegal criminals that commit crimes day in and day out on your dime. All the while, they know they have laws in place that if enforced would help to stem the violence. That would never satisfy their ultimate goal of disarmament and control over the masses.

How many times are millions of lawful gun owners going to accept the fact that some people broke laws and rules while the media and the anti gun ranties spout off the same drivel and we argue the semantics when we no exactly where the failure occurred. We are not the problem!

 

[XTAV750]

We've all been saying for years that for victims it's easier to blame the tool than the person using the tool. We've also been saying that even if they restrict, register and confiscate guns for law abiding citizens, the unstable, disturbed and evil people will still find a way to carry out their crimes. We've been saying it and saying it and saying it..... The trouble is, no one is listening. No one is listening because it's easier to blame the object than to look at the evil that really exists in society right in the eye, and try to fix it.

These things will never change. Every deranged killer will leave some obvious clues that people will ignore. He will kill innocents, and ultimately himself, and the families will cry for gun control. They'll do this because it's easier than saying, "we ignored our deranged son even when he was telling EVERYONE he was going to kill people." Rather than shoulder any responsibility, they blame the tool.

These things will never change.

 

[rkwjunior]

Ok so let's say that is accurate, that his therapist said he had blatant signs of being dangerous to himself or others. Now what? Lock him up? Give him more drugs? What is it you want to do? He functions in society, doesn't break any laws etc. is he a whacko? Absolutely. There are dozens of wackos roaming the streets daily. Every single one of us has had thoughts about doing shit we shouldn't, the difference is, most of us don't act on them. How do you propose filtering them?

If a therapist can say that an individual is a danger to society or himself then he needs to be committed. If Elliot was called a "danger to society and himself", wouldn't you call that filtered?? I'm sure his therapist has many mentally ill patients that don't fit the Elliot description and can be deemed a "no threat" to society. There are thousands of whackos amongst us that we are oblivious too, but they don't have signs of killing people. There is a big difference in levels of wacko, why does everyone assume that one wacko is the same as the next?? Elliot was an absolute threat to society, no ifs, ands, or buts about it, his therapist knew it, his family knew it, but no one did anything until it was to late, i don't think it can get anymore cut and dry, he was a ticking time bomb.

 

[Admin]

Statists can't handle the danger and risk associated with Freedom. So something MUST be done. Some statists will disarm everyone to "save just one life" (left-wing?). Some will arbitrarily incarcerate potentially dangerous individuals before they've done anything for the same reason (right-wing?).

People who believe in Individual Freedom don't think .gov need to do anything, as this is a natural condition of Free People to be in danger and in control of their own safety within the Free Society (.gov can protect from foreign invaders via the collective delegation of the Free Society).

Bingo

 

[Quiet]

So why is it that it is our responsibility to " rescue" this person?

I think the under the bridge thing is a little harsh. Is there a clean shot to the head option?

Because the guy above you who wants to continue to call people names is apparently very conflicted. He seems all bent out of shape by the us tossing some bombs at the enemy and inflicting a little collateral damage on a little Pakistani girl, but couldn't give a flying fahoogie about his neighbor's daughter who is suffering in his own backyard.

The .gov prevents intercession by friends and relatives. In the good old days, a family would keep uncle fester down in the basement and care for at least his most basic needs. Now the .gov won't allow people to kidnap their own relatives for the rrelative's own good. The .gov has stepped in and usurped authority and responsibility.

So we are left with a choice of several unpleasant options: Uncle Fester in the basement, Auntie LuLu under the bridge or Sissy Statie being cared for by .gov. Unless there's a third option ? Home,state or streets.

I suppose we could buy'em a one way ticket to Honolulu.

I

 

[GPP]

If a therapist can say that an individual is a danger to society or himself then he needs to be committed. If Elliot was called a "danger to society and himself", wouldn't you call that filtered?? I'm sure his therapist has many mentally ill patients that don't fit the Elliot description and can be deemed a "no threat" to society. There are thousands of whackos amongst us that we are oblivious too, but they don't have signs of killing people. There is a big difference in levels of wacko, why does everyone assume that one wacko is the same as the next?? Elliot was an absolute threat to society, no ifs, ands, or buts about it, his therapist knew it, his family knew it, but no one did anything until it was to late, i don't think it can get anymore cut and dry, he was a ticking time bomb.

Right to " needs to be committed" huh? Ok let's go right to that I guess. Who do you think has more juice to get this kid committed, the therapist, the family, or the cops? So he gets committed. Evaluated. Then what? Keep him in there for life? Do you think he's " fixable" ? He's gonna get released eventually. This stuff isn't nearly as cut and dry as you think. Giving the police, or doctors, or families, the ability to get you committed is a pretty slippery slope.

 

[Admin]

If a therapist can say that an individual is a danger to society or himself then he needs to be committed. If Elliot was called a "danger to society and himself", wouldn't you call that filtered?? I'm sure his therapist has many mentally ill patients that don't fit the Elliot description and can be deemed a "no threat" to society. There are thousands of whackos amongst us that we are oblivious too, but they don't have signs of killing people. There is a big difference in levels of wacko, why does everyone assume that one wacko is the same as the next?? Elliot was an absolute threat to society, no ifs, ands, or buts about it, his therapist knew it, his family knew it, but no one did anything until it was to late, i don't think it can get anymore cut and dry, he was a ticking time bomb.

So what do you think needed to be done? Have him locked up for not committing a crime? We let some random Therapist who isn't a doctor, not that it matters, dictate who is free and who isn't?

There are a million of guys just like him who don't ever act on anything. Should we lock them up too?

 

[rkwjunior]

You are advocating stealing children... Not every Adam Lanza goes on a killing spree... These "nut jobs" are also human beings that haven't done wrong yet.

What you are doing is playing Monday-morning quarterback with your two examples. The .gov would steal peoples children and imprison innocent people if we gave them more authority to "fix" this problem

You use certain words just like a liberal to glorify a problem, like "innocent children". Adam Lanza and Elliot are hardly innocent, even before they committed the crimes, they are born killers do to a chemical imbalance or genetic problem, these aren't the same "innocent children" that have ADHD or mild asbergers that your talking about.

You contradicted yourself, if a person is an Adam Lanza, as diagnosed by a therapist, then he is a danger to society. His therapist, and mother also knew he was a danger. She paid the price not because she didn't know he was dangerous, but because they ignored it and put a band-aid (meds) on a problem that needed stitches.

I think people here think that these upper level wackos like Elliot and Adam can't be easily diagnosed, well so far your wrong, their therapists had no doubt of the severity and danger of their illness, and these are the ones who should get 24/7 supervision and attention.

 

[Admin]

Because the guy above you who wants to continue to call people names is apparently very conflicted.

Didn't your father tell you to ignore people who call you names?

 

[Quiet]

To be clear, "Uncle Fester in the basement" means the .gov no longer is involving itself in the affairs of the people.
"Sissy Statie being cared for by .gov" means just that, and
"Auntie LuLu under the bridge" is when nobody can or will do anything and we turn our backs on those who are suffering and dying.
I think those are the options.

 

[GPP]

Because the guy above you who wants to continue to call people names is apparently very conflicted. He seems all bent out of shape by the us tossing some bombs at the enemy and inflicting a little collateral damage on a little Pakistani girl, but couldn't give a flying fahoogie about his neighbor's daughter who is suffering in his own backyard.

The .gov prevents intercession by friends and relatives. In the good old days, a family would keep uncle fester down in the basement and care for at least his most basic needs. Now the .gov won't allow people to kidnap their own relatives for the rrelative's own good. The .gov has stepped in and usurped authority and responsibility.

So we are left with a choice of several unpleasant options: Uncle Fester in the basement, Auntie LuLu under the bridge or Sissy Statie being cared for by .gov. Unless there's a third option ? Home,state or streets.

I suppose we could buy'em a one way ticket to Honolulu.

I

you should probably do some more reading. The .gov has absolutely not prevented intercession by family and friends. Your uncle Fester reference is pretty disturbing, but I think I understand what you mean. That ability still exists, and it existed for our friendo there in CA. His parents decided somehow that he was fine. His therapist and docs decided the same thing. If they knew he wasn't fine, then they dropped the ball.

Collateral damage over in Afghanistan or Pakistan is one of the shitty prices of playing that game. If their own .govs stepped up to the plate, things would be different for the little Pakistani girl.

 

[ntomsw]

Wow.

 

[Quiet]

Uncle Fester was on the Addams Family he's not related to Uncle Chester the Molester. Uncle Fester was crazy and probably needed to be cared for. Wiki him

I've not been talking about overtly dangerous people yet. I don't believe we can "catch" all the homicidal nuts. But if we care for those who need it, offer services to those who will accept them and yes, lock up the ones like Jared Remy and not give him 27 batterings at the apple we might catch a few more. We'll never know the successes, if any.

 

[rkwjunior]

So what do you think needed to be done? Have him locked up for not committing a crime? We let some random Therapist who isn't a doctor, not that it matters, dictate who is free and who isn't?

There are a million of guys just like him who don't ever act on anything. Should we lock them up too?

No, have him committed because he is a danger to society as diagnosed by a Dr. I honestly think people under estimate how dangerous these upper level crazies are, behind an innocent face and smile a killer exists, and it's obvious Elliots Dr and family knew it.

like i said, there are many levels of crazy that can be filtered, and Elliot was filtered, but ignored.

 

[GPP]

Uncle Fester was on the Addams Family he's not related to Uncle Chester the Molester. Uncle Fester was crazy and probably needed to be cared for. Wiki him

I've not been talking about overtly dangerous people yet. I don't believe we can "catch" all the homicidal nuts. But if we care for those who need it, offer services to those who will accept them and yes, lock up the ones like Jared Remy and not give him 27 batterings at the apple we might catch a few more. We'll never know the successes, if any.

I'm pretty familiar with Uncle Fester, I'm getting close to 50 lol. It's just your description of keeping him in the basement in regards to the family taking care of him. It's certainly not off the table as an option for families to take care of adult children, .gov hasn't changed that. Hindsight is just that, hindsight. You don't hear about the families and docs and therapists saying " I told you so" until after he shoots up a school.

 

[Admin]

No, have him committed because he is a danger to society as diagnosed by a Dr. I honestly think people under estimate how dangerous these upper level crazies are, behind an innocent face and smile a killer exists, and it's obvious Elliots Dr and family knew it.

like i said, there are many levels of crazy that can be filtered, and Elliot was filtered, but ignored.

What did he do prior to last week that made him a danger to society? He just graduated college and nobody at school was worried about him.

He clearly stated he was angry because he was a virgin and the bitches weren't putting out.

 

[Admin]

Fixed your signature

"A Freeman shall be debarred of his freedoms because of the opinions of one man."
By rkwjunior

 

[Quiet]

So what do you think needed to be done? Have him locked up for not committing a crime? We let some random Therapist who isn't a doctor, not that it matters, dictate who is free and who isn't?

There are a million of guys just like him who don't ever act on anything. Should we lock them up too?

Somewhere way back in the thread I suggested that a parent's "complaint" that their child (adult child) was in crisis and was a danger to himself/others, that should be takeninto consideration with heavy weighting. That a call like that should trigger a process... And I flung one off the top of my head: the calling parent should be askednif there's a current mental health provider,if there was one s/he should be brought into the conversation, and based on the caregivers knowledge of the child coupled with the concerns of the parent should be sufficient for an evaluation, compulsory if necessary. This I think would be far superior and have a higher standard of proof than current, where a judge and a therapist who don't know the child decide. And a much better process than what happened at Isla Vista where some patrol cops chatted with him and decided he was fine.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm pretty familiar with Uncle Fester, I'm getting close to 50 lol. It's just your description of keeping him in the basement in regards to the family taking care of him. It's certainly not off the table as an option for families to take care of adult children, .gov hasn't changed that. Hindsight is just that, hindsight. You don't hear about the families and docs and therapists saying " I told you so" until after he shoots up a school.

Its the ones who don't want to stay and have to be kept there... :-(

 

[GPP]

Somewhere way back in the thread I suggested that a parent's "complaint" that their child (adult child) was in crisis and was a danger to himself/others, that should be takeninto consideration with heavy weighting. That a call like that should trigger a process... And I flung one off the top of my head: the calling parent should be askednif there's a current mental health provider,if there was one s/he should be brought into the conversation, and based on the caregivers knowledge of the child coupled with the concerns of the parent should be sufficient for an evaluation, compulsory if necessary. This I think would be far superior and have a higher standard of proof than current, where a judge and a therapist who don't know the child decide. And a much better process than what happened at Isla Vista where some patrol cops chatted with him and decided he was fine.

All well and good, but you're back to the patrol cops chatting with him and deciding he was fine. Have you ever had to do something like that? Have you ever talked face to face with someone that could lie right thru his teeth? You know he's lying, but there's nothing you can do about it. Let's say the cops knew he was lying to them. Should the cops be given the right to place you in custody because they thought you lied?

 

[Admin]

Should the cops be given the right to place you in custody because they thought you lied?

If it might prevent violence, yup!

 

[GPP]

If it might prevent violence, yup!

Holy crap that would sure make my job easier. Liar liar, pants on fire, into the gulag you go!

 

[richc]

No, have him committed because he is a danger to society as diagnosed by a Dr. I honestly think people under estimate how dangerous these upper level crazies are, behind an innocent face and smile a killer exists, and it's obvious Elliots Dr and family knew it.

like i said, there are many levels of crazy that can be filtered, and Elliot was filtered, but ignored.

Easy to say until they knock on your door and take you or people you care about...

Here's an interesting article about psychopaths. The author is a researcher who has been seeking anatomical brain patterns to help identify psychopaths. He used scans of family members as controls.

He found one family member who had clear and obvious brain anatomy signs for psychopathy. Knowing he had numerous murderers in his family tree, including Lizzie Borden, he decided to figure out which family member was the psycho... and it was the researcher himself.

So he had all the signs and yet he was a high functioning, contributing member of society.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/scien...covered-he-was-a-psychopath-180947814/?no-ist

If we go locking up everyone who has certain "signs and symptoms" it will be a slippery slope. FYI licensed health care professionals are mandatory reporters in most cases, especially if they feel there is a strong likelihood of a violent act. The police did investigate and this kid did what he does best... he manipulated them. Psychopaths are really good at that.

If it becomes too easy to commit someone you think vindictive wives and husbands in a divorce situation will use that as leverage? Check out the number of BS restraining orders out there these days in divorce situations.

The threshold on this has to be high... very high. Sadly we as a society will never, ever stop all these types of events from happening. Some of the perpetrators are not only mentally ill, but also very, very smart. They will find a way.

Finally we as a society cannot and should not make serious changes to our laws and rights because of incidents like these. Yes what happened was horrible. We can agree on that. But if we react to every single instance of violence with more laws, and more rights stripped, we become a nation without freedoms. And freedoms is what we're supposed to be all about.

 

[Quiet]

All well and good, but you're back to the patrol cops chatting with him and deciding he was fine. Have you ever had to do something like that? Have you ever talked face to face with someone that could lie right thru his teeth? You know he's lying, but there's nothing you can do about it. Let's say the cops knew he was lying to them. Should the cops be given the right to place you in custody because they thought you lied?

Holy crap that would sure make my job easier. Liar liar, pants on fire, into the gulag you go!

heh. I'mnnot faulting them at all. I understand, as best a civvy can I suppose, that you can't go on nothing. With "my" scenario they could/would have taken him in because of the mother's and psychiatrist's "complaint". It might be like someone swearing out a warrant for an eval. Anyway, its just a thought about how to fix a little bit of the broken system/process.

 

[TLB]

Easy to say until they knock on your door and take you or people you care about...

Here's an interesting article about psychopaths. The author is a researcher who has been seeking anatomical brain patterns to help identify psychopaths. He used scans of family members as controls.

He found one family member who had clear and obvious brain anatomy signs for psychopathy. Knowing he had numerous murderers in his family tree, including Lizzie Borden, he decided to figure out which family member was the psycho... and it was the researcher himself.

So he had all the signs and yet he was a high functioning, contributing member of society.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/scien...covered-he-was-a-psychopath-180947814/?no-ist

If we go locking up everyone who has certain "signs and symptoms" it will be a slippery slope. FYI licensed health care professionals are mandatory reporters in most cases, especially if they feel there is a strong likelihood of a violent act. The police did investigate and this kid did what he does best... he manipulated them. Psychopaths are really good at that.

If it becomes too easy to commit someone you think vindictive wives and husbands in a divorce situation will use that as leverage? Check out the number of BS restraining orders out there these days in divorce situations.

The threshold on this has to be high... very high. Sadly we as a society will never, ever stop all these types of events from happening. Some of the perpetrators are not only mentally ill, but also very, very smart. They will find a way.

Finally we as a society cannot and should not make serious changes to our laws and rights because of incidents like these. Yes what happened was horrible. We can agree on that. But if we react to every single instance of violence with more laws, and more rights stripped, we become a nation without freedoms. And freedoms is what we're supposed to be all about.

+1

 

[Quiet]

Easy to say until they knock on your door and take you or people you care about...

Here's an interesting article about psychopaths. The author is a researcher who has been seeking anatomical brain patterns to help identify psychopaths. He used scans of family members as controls.


The threshold on this has to be high... very high. Sadly we as a society will never, ever stop all these types of events from happening. Some of the perpetrators are not only mentally ill, but also very, very smart. They will find a way.

Finally we as a society cannot and should not make serious changes to our laws and rights because of incidents like these. Yes what happened was horrible. We can agree on that. But if we react to every single instance of violence with more laws, and more rights stripped, we become a nation without freedoms. And freedoms is what we're supposed to be all about.

The current threshold is a judge and a brief interview with sa therapist or social worker....

And I seem to recall that brain researcher story being on TV maybe 60 minutes. Funny!

 

[fencer]

I think what it really boils down to is that only way to prevent or reduce the number of people slaughtered by these psychos, is through increased personal responsibility by individuals for their personal safety.

Whether it was this whacko, or the Newtown nut job, or the Colorado freak show, all of these incidents could have been avoided if an armed citizen had the means and courage to intervene.

We can't rely on families, the police and especially the joke that is the mental health system to protect us from homicidal maniacs. We can however rely on Smith and Wesson, Glock and Sig Sauer.

We keep trying to figure out how we can identify and prevent people from going Looney Tunes and killing people and the truth is we can't. There are to many of them and to many potential victims. Wolves eat sheep because they are easy to kill. If sheep were all armed with Thompsons, wolves would learn to eat more rabbits.

As I get older I realize that I become a bigger easier target for people that would do harm to me and mine. I don't rely on therapists, the police or anyone else to protect me. If more people took their own protection seriously this kid would have been shot by his first roommate, the movie theater guy wouldn't have made it past the snack bar and Lanza would have been dropped in the parking lot of that elementary school.

 

[Lcstyle]

Easy to say until they knock on your door and take you or people you care about...

Here's an interesting article about psychopaths. The author is a researcher who has been seeking anatomical brain patterns to help identify psychopaths. He used scans of family members as controls.

He found one family member who had clear and obvious brain anatomy signs for psychopathy. Knowing he had numerous murderers in his family tree, including Lizzie Borden, he decided to figure out which family member was the psycho... and it was the researcher himself.

So he had all the signs and yet he was a high functioning, contributing member of society.

Great article RichC, I'm going to go ahead and ride your coat tails a bit here and further push the envelope by making a bold assertion.

SOCIETY NEEDS PSYCHOPATHS

Yes, I said it. There are many reasons for this, but primarily, we need people like this to fill the roles of ultimate BAD GUY. We need people like this so we can point our finger at them and say "THERE, THAT'S THE BAD GUY", and then we can convince ourselves that the collective us, we're much better, we're not sick like them. We push all of our dirty work off to the military and other groups and have them do our violence for us. Then when they go a little too far, we act shocked and chastise them for it. I think it's hilarious watching it all, it's the worst kind of soap opera.

This article talks about just a few reasons why we need psychopaths.

I realized from quite early on in my childhood that I saw things differently than other people,” he wrote. “But more often than not, it's helped me in my life. Psychopathy (if that's what you want to call it) is like a medicine for modern times. If you take it in moderation, it can prove extremely beneficial. It can alleviate a lot of existential ailments that we would otherwise fall victim to because our fragile psychological immune systems just aren't up to the job of protecting us. But if you take too much of it, if you overdose on it, then there can, as is the case with all medicines, be some rather unpleasant side effects.”

The e-mail had got me thinking. Might this eminent criminal defense lawyer have a point? Was psychopathy a “medicine for modern times”? The typical traits of a psychopath are ruthlessness, charm, focus, mental toughness, fearlessness, mindfulness and action. Who wouldn't at certain points in their lives benefit from kicking one or two of these up a notch?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/wisdom-from-psychopaths/

http://www.businessinsider.com/does-society-actually-need-psychopaths-2012-12

 

[richc]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/21/top-10-psychopathic-professions-ceo-lawyer-then-me/

"In what’s been billed as one of the most overlooked books of recent years — “The Wisdom of Psychopaths: What Saints, Spies and Serial Killers Can Teach Us About Success” — author Kevin Dutton finds that CEOs lead the list in terms of most psychopathic persons. That’s followed by lawyers, and then by members of television and radio media, Time reported. Numbers four and five are salesperson and surgeon — and then the media makes the list again, with the number six slot held by journalists."

Hey, I'm a CEO... hmmm!

Great article RichC, I'm going to go ahead and ride your coat tails a bit here and further push the envelope by making a bold assertion.

SOCIETY NEEDS PSYCHOPATHS

Yes, I said it. There are many reasons for this, but primarily, we need people like this to fill the roles of ultimate BAD GUY. We need people like this so we can point our finger at them and say "THERE, THAT'S THE BAD GUY", and then we can convince ourselves that the collective us, we're much better, we're not sick like them. We push all of our dirty work off to the military and other groups and have them do our violence for us. Then when they go a little too far, we act shocked and chastise them for it. I think it's hilarious watching it all, it's the worst kind of soap opera.

This article talks about just a few reasons why we need psychopaths.




http://www.businessinsider.com/does-society-actually-need-psychopaths-2012-12

 

[rkwjunior]

Easy to say until they knock on your door and take you or people you care about...

Here's an interesting article about psychopaths. The author is a researcher who has been seeking anatomical brain patterns to help identify psychopaths. He used scans of family members as controls.

He found one family member who had clear and obvious brain anatomy signs for psychopathy. Knowing he had numerous murderers in his family tree, including Lizzie Borden, he decided to figure out which family member was the psycho... and it was the researcher himself.

So he had all the signs and yet he was a high functioning, contributing member of society.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/scien...covered-he-was-a-psychopath-180947814/?no-ist

If we go locking up everyone who has certain "signs and symptoms" it will be a slippery slope. FYI licensed health care professionals are mandatory reporters in most cases, especially if they feel there is a strong likelihood of a violent act. The police did investigate and this kid did what he does best... he manipulated them. Psychopaths are really good at that.

If it becomes too easy to commit someone you think vindictive wives and husbands in a divorce situation will use that as leverage? Check out the number of BS restraining orders out there these days in divorce situations.

The threshold on this has to be high... very high. Sadly we as a society will never, ever stop all these types of events from happening. Some of the perpetrators are not only mentally ill, but also very, very smart. They will find a way.

Finally we as a society cannot and should not make serious changes to our laws and rights because of incidents like these. Yes what happened was horrible. We can agree on that. But if we react to every single instance of violence with more laws, and more rights stripped, we become a nation without freedoms. And freedoms is what we're supposed to be all about.

Going around knocking on people doors is far fetched, and i don't know why this is being exaggerated. Nothing was said about gathering up any crazy off the street, why is that statement being twisted?? The 2 particular crazies we know about had issues that couldn't be more obvious. Just because they are high functioning doesn't make them any less dangerous, that makes them more dangerous, living amongst the general public undetected by everyday people but known by Dr's and family members to dangerous. I honestly don't think an individual has to first commit an act of violence to be labeled dangerous if a Dr is telling the family, "Hey, your son is without a doubt a ticking time bomb and this is what I suggest, and if u don't, lives are at stake, possibly yours. His parent are also lucky to be alive.

If the pro 2a people want the anti's to stay away from blaming guns, and we suggest "cleaning up the mental health system", then what needs too be done, keep Giving out more prescriptions, that's seems to work great??? Elliot and Adams families both had money and we're able to give them the best care they could give, so what else can be done without committing these specifically dangerous individuals? ?

 

[Nick Fury]

Going around knocking on people doors is far fetched, and i don't know why this is being exaggerated. Nothing was said about gathering up any crazy off the street, why is that statement being twisted?? The 2 particular crazies we know about had issues that couldn't be more obvious. Just because they are high functioning doesn't make them any less dangerous, that makes them more dangerous, living amongst the general public undetected by everyday people but known by Dr's and family members to dangerous. I honestly don't think an individual has to first commit an act of violence to be labeled dangerous if a Dr is telling the family, "Hey, your son is without a doubt a ticking time bomb and this is what I suggest, and if u don't, lives are at stake, possibly yours. His parent are also lucky to be alive.

If the pro 2a people want the anti's to stay away from blaming guns, and we suggest "cleaning up the mental health system", then what needs too be done, keep Giving out more prescriptions, that's seems to work great??? Elliot and Adams families both had money and we're able to give them the best care they could give, so what else can be done without committing these specifically dangerous individuals? ?

I know your trying to drive your point home but your not paying much attention to some very telling facts. Sample these tidbits again:

He harbored jealous rage and hate toward someone who had a few play dates at his house. Enough to obsess about it for the rest of his thankfully short life. But the important part of this is the person in question was surprised to hear these feelings had existed at all and mentioned the killer said maybe 3 words during these playdates. Sounds like he might just be shy?

And much later when his concerned mother calls the cops to check on his well being and all they can come back with is he seems a little shy? Yet because of his documentation of this event we now know he was actually shitting his pants and thinking his years of planning and entire life was about to end. Yet he was able remain a cool enough customer to fool everyone yet again that he was not a threat to himself or others.

So how is your psycho section net going to catch slippery nuts like him without hauling the rest of the mental health population in along with him? Your not and you know it. But you seem ok with that...