Shooting at Bar in California

justincredible

Honorable Admin

Thu, Nov 8, 2018 8:41 AM

https://apnews.com/1c7d0ad80d7a478fbfa306751251da82

Looks like 13 dead, including a sheriff and the gunman. Perp was 29-years-old and used a .45 handgun.

superman

Senior Member

Thu, Nov 8, 2018 10:15 AM

Sad.  Looks like a lot of college students were victims.  As a parent, this stuff just makes me sick. 

j_crazy

7 gram rocks. how i roll.

Thu, Nov 8, 2018 1:29 PM

toughest gun laws in the US, AR ban, clip limits, etc. 

 

regulations don't stop tragedies folks. we need to have an intervention on the human level to stop this shit.

queencitybuckeye

Senior Member

Thu, Nov 8, 2018 1:34 PM
posted by j_crazy

toughest gun laws in the US, AR ban, clip limits, etc. 

 

regulations don't stop tragedies folks. we need to have an intervention on the human level to stop this shit.

Was reported that he had an illegal in California 26 round magazine in the Glock he used. You're exactly right, laws are not the answer.

CenterBHSFan

333 - I'm only half evil

Thu, Nov 8, 2018 3:32 PM

Has there been a motive found yet?

 

queencitybuckeye

Senior Member

Thu, Nov 8, 2018 3:37 PM

He was a marine and suffered from PTSD. Why this bar and why now are unknown AFAIK.

Spock

Senior Member

Thu, Nov 8, 2018 4:23 PM

#banbars

QuakerOats

Senior Member

Fri, Nov 9, 2018 12:00 PM

 

Probably time to back to the days of secure mental health clinics.

queencitybuckeye

Senior Member

Fri, Nov 9, 2018 1:27 PM

There may be several, but I can't think of any societal problems where half the people suggest treating a symptom instead of the cause. Round numbers, 100,000,000 people with three times that many guns shot exactly no one, but somehow the solution seems to be making all of their lives slightly more difficult. Is it a "we have to do something" kind of deal, a more nefarious motive, a combination of both, or something else?

gut

Senior Member

Sat, Nov 10, 2018 3:48 PM
posted by queencitybuckeye

There may be several, but I can't think of any societal problems where half the people suggest treating a symptom instead of the cause. Round numbers, 100,000,000 people with three times that many guns shot exactly no one, but somehow the solution seems to be making all of their lives slightly more difficult. Is it a "we have to do something" kind of deal, a more nefarious motive, a combination of both, or something else?

It's all politics.  Drunk drivers kill something like 30,000 people a year.  And we have laws and enforcement, but no one suggests banning alcohol or bars.  But it's become a winning campaign issue for both sides (and issues such as this are especially popular because you can grandstand without having to know anything or having any real policy = no energy or effort to stump on).

You can't cocoon everyone from accidents and danger and still have a free society.

CenterBHSFan

333 - I'm only half evil

Sat, Nov 10, 2018 4:35 PM

No you can't cocoon society from danger. But you can, when recognized, removed somebody that is out of their mind from society until they can get right in the head, if they even can. We don't seem to have the fortitude to do that. We don't want to pay the cost financially or emotionally.

Instead, we'll wait till disaster happens and wring our hands because of an atrocity that was entirely preventable in many if not most cases.

gut

Senior Member

Sat, Nov 10, 2018 4:52 PM
posted by CenterBHSFan

No you can't cocoon society from danger. But you can, when recognized, removed somebody that is out of their mind from society until they can get right in the head, if they even can.

Do you have any concept for how difficult and inexact it is to do what you're proposing?  You're literally talking about severely restricting hundreds of thousands of people who exhibit signs of being "at risk" in the hopes of preventing a handful of people who carry this out.

I'd guess that like 99.9% of severe nut jobs don't harm anyone, yet you seem to believe they all should be locked-up.

CenterBHSFan

333 - I'm only half evil

Sat, Nov 10, 2018 5:23 PM
posted by gut

Do you have any concept for how difficult and inexact it is to do what you're proposing?  You're literally talking about severely restricting hundreds of thousands of people who exhibit signs of being "at risk" in the hopes of preventing a handful of people who carry this out.

I'd guess that like 99.9% of severe nut jobs don't harm anyone, yet you seem to believe they all should be locked-up.

No no, it's not as general as that. But I'd bet my farm that there are doctors that know when a patient of theirs is is beyond a regular "risk". There are also times when police have investigated or even the FBI and yet nothing further was done. I am not talking about people who occasionally forget or mix up their meds. I'm not talking about cutters or huffers. I'm not talking about people who are depressed. I'm specifically talking about people who are known by their doctors and other authorities that they are dangerous and more than likely to act on their inclinations. The Florida shooter, Cruz, is a good example of this.