At least 12 killed at California bar shooting

[spartan max2]

2 minutes ago, freetoroam said:

Why because they might not be able to own a gun? Is that really a issue? If someone with mental issues is concerned about owning a gun before seeking help, all the more reason why they should not be allowed one. 

Many of the people with mental issues did not go to seek help, example is Long had the mental health 'specialist' called in on him, they did not remove his rights to own a gun.

Anyone who has the MHS called in on them should be seriously evaluated for gun ownership. 

As I mentioned some sort of red flag type law, where people get called in on for showing dangerous behavior I'm fine with.

I just do not agree with a blanket ban on individuals with a diagnosis, it is unfair to punish the whole group for the actions of a minority.

[freetoroam]

1 hour ago, griss47 said:

Regarding mental health issues and gun ownership.  Where do you draw the line with determining which mental health issues would prohibit an individual from owning a gun and who would make that decision?  This might be a little long, but I think you will see my point at the end.

Many years ago, I was working for a large mortgage company that was experiencing financial troubles due to the mortgage crisis.  There were layoffs almost weekly and you never knew from day to day if you would have a job the next day.  I had worked for that company right out of college, so all my work experience was in that industry.  The entire industry was in trouble due to the mortgage crisis, so finding a job with another company was difficult at best.  At the time, my three kids were very young and (although my wife also worked) I made about 65% of our income.  During this time, I began to experience anxiety attacks.  Now, I haven't had an anxiety attack in many years, but the fact that I did is in my medical records.

Fast forward to 9 years ago when I began working for my current company.  One aspect of my job is to set up auctions of equipment belonging to companies that have gone out of business.  It isn't unusual for me to be alone or with just one other person in a factory or building in a very bad area of town while preparing the auction site.  I can't tell you how times I've been setting up an auction and heard gunshots, witnessed gang fights, seen a driver intentionally run another car off the road and flee, etc.  Because I have to be in these areas on a regular basis, I carry a firearm.  Thankfully, I'm generally very safe and have not once had to draw my weapon.  But, there have been a few occasions where I thought I might have no other choice.

So, because I have experienced a, "mental health issue" (anxiety attacks) should I be prevented from owning a gun for my own protection in these areas?

 

No, unless you have had numerous run ins with the police?

Sorry to hear about what you went through.

There are generally more serious signs when someones bubble is expanding too far, here in Longs case, apart from the run ins and his postings on a forum, even his mother had concerns:

Quote

A neighbor said Long's mother "lived in fear" of what her son might do, saying when police were called to the house earlier this year "it took them about a half a day to get him out of the house."

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/11/08/us/thousand-oaks-gunman/index.html

 

[freetoroam]

14 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

As I mentioned some sort of red flag type law, where people get called in on for showing dangerous behavior I'm fine with.

I just do not agree with a blanket ban on individuals with a diagnosis, it is unfair to punish the whole group for the actions of a minority.

It is not quite as cut and dry as that. See my post above #53.

Like many of the past teenage mass shooters, there were signs and some came from the fear or worry from their family. 

But on that note if someone is on medication because of schizophrenia, then no, they should not be allowed to own a gun. 

I have seen what can happen 'twice' when people do not take their medication and i have absolutely no doubt if they had been allowed to own a gun, they would have used one. Both used a weapon to harm and thankfully both victims survived.  Chances are they would have both been killed if the people had owned a gun.

It is not punishing someone by trying to protect others and in many cases, even themselves. 

If there are signs the person can be a danger to themselves or others and have been diagnosed with mental issues - absolutely no way should they be allowed to own a gun. 

 

[docyabut2]

To many people killed  the country should start opening mental ill centers  again,  like they did in my day and  I knew some people  that were admitted.

[+and-then]

7 hours ago, freetoroam said:

He was well known to the police and even though the mental health 'specialist' cleared him, there seemed to be signs he was not the full shilling, does that not constitute to looking at his gun status? 

The only other way a citizen loses the right to own and carry a gun is if they are involuntarily committed to a mental hospital.  He wasn't.  Freedom is a huge responsibility and not everyone can handle it.  

[Black Red Devil]

2 hours ago, docyabut2 said:

To many people killed  the country should start opening mental ill centers  again,  like they did in my day and  I knew some people  that were admitted.

It's a crazy world you people live in.  Almost a gun per capita and the massacres continue. Obviously the theory of "more guns to stop the criminals" isn't working if even cops become fatalities when somebody snaps and has easy access to weapons that can kill dozens in the blink of an eye.

[SHaYap]

6 hours ago, freetoroam said:

Does someone who has been diagnosed with a mental health issue affect the rights to own a gun? 

We know not everyone with a mental health issue is going to go and cause a mass shooting,  but that is not the point, the point is all mass shooters have had mental health issues.

So when do the "specialists" draw a line? 

It is quite apparent that it has become those that don't want or have guns are fast becoming the mentally and criminally insane

~

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

10 minutes ago, Black Red Devil said:

It's a crazy world you people live in.  Almost a gun per capita and the massacres continue. Obviously the theory of "more guns to stop the criminals" isn't working if even cops become fatalities when somebody snaps and has easy access to weapons that can kill dozens in the blink of an eye.

Ok, allow me to pontificate  lol. And good to see "and then" and you, devil.

The number of lives lost in the US because we are a gun toting society is small compared to what we *could* lose in a communist purge. You may think I am just spinning a theoretical for all it's worth but seriously, I am worried about America. The lib democrats, aka socialists (imo), are a violent power crazed group of people. There have been many hundreds of attacks on people because the support Trump or because they are conservative, and white, you know - all the markings of a racist, and it is far worse now than I have ever seen it. You won't see that in the lib media and frankly, that is the vast majority of the news media.

In fact, in my life, I have never seen any one political group have such hatred for the other as I see right now.

The long and short of it is this... I'd rather go down swinging then lay there and die. Right now, innocent Americans need guns.

 

[Black Red Devil]

11 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Ok, allow me to pontificate  lol. And good to see "and then" and you, devil.

The number of lives lost in the US because we are a gun toting society is small compared to what we *could* lose in a communist purge. You may think I am just spinning a theoretical for all it's worth but seriously, I am worried about America. The lib democrats, aka socialists (imo), are a violent power crazed group of people. There have been many hundreds of attacks on people because the support Trump or because they are conservative, and white, you know - all the markings of a racist, and it is far worse now than I have ever seen it. You won't see that in the lib media and frankly, that is the vast majority of the news media.

In fact, in my life, I have never seen any one political group have such hatred for the other as I see right now.

The long and short of it is this... I'd rather go down swinging then lay there and die. Right now, innocent Americans need guns.

 

Good to hear from you too earl but what you just wrote was just the result of Trumps rhetoric since he entered the political scene.  He's managed to make it a "them vs us" on everything and everyone.  Racially, through gender, religiously, financially and most of all politically, he's managed to turn your society one against the other and hilariously all under the banner of "Make America Great" for all Americans.  In actual fact, you've taken it to a new level proclaiming that guns are needed to fight the opposition.  Wow.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

16 minutes ago, Black Red Devil said:

Good to hear from you too earl but what you just wrote was just the result of Trumps rhetoric since he entered the political scene.  He's managed to make it a "them vs us" on everything and everyone.  Racially, through gender, religiously, financially and most of all politically, he's managed to turn your society one against the other and hilariously all under the banner of "Make America Great" for all Americans.  In actual fact, you've taken it to a new level proclaiming that guns are needed to fight the opposition.  Wow.

RedBlack, I am serious when I tell you, there are vicious dems out there that want violence against people who are conservative.

You say Trump divided America...? you should hear the lib media here. They're NON STOP. It's like a bunch of friggin' propaganda machines.

And Maxine Waters publicly urging dems to harass Trump admin officials in public... WTF??? https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/25/politics/maxine-waters-trump-officials/index.html

It's uglier than I ever saw it in my life.

[Gunn]

5 hours ago, griss47 said:

No on both counts.  I guess I wasn't clear enough in my post where I was going. 

I was trying to convey to freetoroam that it can be a slippery slope.  Who would determine which mental issues keep someone from owning a firearm?  Once it's determined that Schizophrenics cannot, what's next?  People with Bipolar Disorder?  Okay, we are keeping those two groups from buying firearms, what's next? People with depression.  Now that people diagnosed with Depression cannot own a firearm, what about people who have experienced Anxiety?   

Ah, my bad for assuming you were speaking to everybody in general. And I agree that it can be a slippery slope. So yeah, I really can't justify taking weapons away from individuals whom made no threats to themselves or others. But that's not usually the case, most of these mass shooters made threats and were physically violent before they committed these mass shootings. And there were several signs and opportunities to stop them before they got to that point. But authorities kept failing to do something about it. Sometimes I think they just pass laws and don't give a **** to enforce the laws they pass.

 

Edited November 9, 2018 by Gunn

[Arbenol]

5 minutes ago, Gunn said:

Ah, my bad for assuming you were speaking to everybody in general. And I agree that it can be a slippery slope. So yeah, I really can't justify taking weapons away from individuals whom made no threats to themselves or others. But that's not usually the case, most of these mass shooters made threats and were physically violent before they committed these mass shootings. And there were several signs and opportunities to stop them before they got to that point. But authorities kept failing to do something about it. Sometimes I think they just pass laws and don't give a ****.

 

The problem is that we can know everything we need to with hindsight. Many people make threats, but don't end up committing mass shootings. Many have been violent, but don't end up committing mass shootings. I would expect that the 'warning signs' so evident in hindsight are shared by a great many people who do not go on to commit any atrocities. These events are so rare (despite their depressing regularity, the actual proportion of the population doing them is vanishingly small) the chances of heading them off are tiny, and you might just end up with a society that can restrict people's liberties without them actually doing anything to justify it. 

[+susieice]

This guy is really lucky! I'm just glad he's alright on all counts.

https://6abc.com/thousand-oaks-shooting-survivor-also-survived-las-vegas-shooting/4648465/?sf201876796=1

[Black Red Devil]

2 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

RedBlack, I am serious when I tell you, there are vicious dems out there that want violence against people who are conservative.

You say Trump divided America...? you should hear the lib media here. They're NON STOP. It's like a bunch of friggin' propaganda machines.

And Maxine Waters publicly urging dems to harass Trump admin officials in public... WTF??? https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/25/politics/maxine-waters-trump-officials/index.html

It's uglier than I ever saw it in my life.

Well she's just another idiot but doesn't mean one rotten fruit makes the whole crop bad and it doesn't mean taking her as an example to unleash hatred towards everything and everyone on the other side.  I would put Ron Paul up there with the best political characters America's produced since JFK and I'm not a Conservative and never will be.  Just to say that you can respect opposing views as long as they're fair minded.  Anyway, this thread isn't about Trump or the D's vs R's.

[Habitat]

1 hour ago, susieice said:

This guy is really lucky! I'm just glad he's alright on all counts.

https://6abc.com/thousand-oaks-shooting-survivor-also-survived-las-vegas-shooting/4648465/?sf201876796=1

Lucky, but unlucky ! 

[SHaYap]

1 hour ago, susieice said:

This guy is really lucky! I'm just glad he's alright on all counts.

Remember his face, next time, if you happen to see his face anywhere, stand behind him or better yet, get out of there, ASAP

~

[RavenHawk]

2 hours ago, Black Red Devil said:

It's a crazy world you people live in.  Almost a gun per capita and the massacres continue. Obviously the theory of "more guns to stop the criminals" isn't working if even cops become fatalities when somebody snaps and has easy access to weapons that can kill dozens in the blink of an eye.

It hasn't been tried yet.  We have as of yet had an incident where someone in a targeted group returned fire.  Except for one incident in Sutherland Springs where a neighbor opened up on the gunman.

But I wanted to look at stats.  They are always too easily forgotten.  We are the 3rd most populous nation in the world at 320 million.  Can you imagine any nation in Europe with that many?  Anyway, I believe that that I saw where there have been 347 killed in mass shootings this year alone?  That's something like 0.000001%.  Now compare that with the number of people that die from cancer and that is a number around 600k, that's almost 0.002%.  I'm not saying that mass shootings aren't important but I think we should put it in perspective.  And realize that it is simply a fabricated crisis to grab guns.  Does the media rush to hospitals and hospice to film the last breath of cancer victims?  Is their deaths any less or untimely than those shot?  More people die in car accidents.  None of it is good, but if you take away guns, people will use other means, cars, bombs, knives, poison, etc.  Using a gun will kill more efficiently, but it is also more of a stigma.  If there were no guns, more ill people would cross that line and kill fewer people per incident but it would probably add to more overall.

[+susieice]

Just found a link that one of the people killed in Thousand Oaks was also at the Las Vegas concert.

http://www.fox29.com/news/local-news/report-telemachus-orfanos-survivor-of-vegas-massacre-killed-in-borderline-bar-mass-shooting?fbclid=IwAR3VoLRimD3iWN4aDJpQ5uc-aTEPjUIRLkmxbURDrMSDORYD4vHu_nQyuWA

[Black Red Devil]

35 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

It hasn't been tried yet.  We have as of yet had an incident where someone in a targeted group returned fire.  Except for one incident in Sutherland Springs where a neighbor opened up on the gunman.

But I wanted to look at stats.  They are always too easily forgotten.  We are the 3rd most populous nation in the world at 320 million.  Can you imagine any nation in Europe with that many?  Anyway, I believe that that I saw where there have been 347 killed in mass shootings this year alone?  That's something like 0.000001%.  Now compare that with the number of people that die from cancer and that is a number around 600k, that's almost 0.002%.  I'm not saying that mass shootings aren't important but I think we should put it in perspective.  And realize that it is simply a fabricated crisis to grab guns.  Does the media rush to hospitals and hospice to film the last breath of cancer victims?  Is their deaths any less or untimely than those shot?  More people die in car accidents.  None of it is good, but if you take away guns, people will use other means, cars, bombs, knives, poison, etc.  Using a gun will kill more efficiently, but it is also more of a stigma.  If there were no guns, more ill people would cross that line and kill fewer people per incident but it would probably add to more overall.

Well take out a couple of zeros when you compare death by guns per year against population because the main issue IS about death by guns.  I agree that it's not THE priority when you compare how people die but it's a traumatic way of dealing and possibly preventing death as the victim or even as a relative of the victim.  As a parent if you take your kids to school you expect them to be alive when you pick them up.  Sure, they can die hit by a car on the way home from school but at least you know there are driver restrictions, safety rules, improved vehicle safety aspects and general road safety education that reduce the risks.  The same with the possibility of getting shot while out at dinner, having fun with friends or simply walking around minding your own business just because some dick, tom or harry had a bad day. Reduce the guns, you reduce the risks.

It's also important for people to feel the need to have some level of control over possibly dangerous situations. Take for example the fear of flying.  A lot more people die in car accidents compared to plane crashes, yet I've never heard anyone say they fear traveling in cars.  I've heard plenty say they fear flying.

It's all about reducing risks by having some level of control.

[freetoroam]

6 hours ago, susieice said:

This guy is really lucky! I'm just glad he's alright on all counts.

https://6abc.com/thousand-oaks-shooting-survivor-also-survived-las-vegas-shooting/4648465/?sf201876796=1

Jeeze.

I am not sure i would call it lucky as such. Sure was not lucky to be at 2 different venues with a shooting,  extrememely fortunate to survive them both though. 

Without sounding disrespectful, i hope "third time lucky" does not occur. 

[freetoroam]

7 hours ago, Arbenol said:

The problem is that we can know everything we need to with hindsight.

Tis true. But with the past mass shooters, each did have signs, Pagourtzis who they said did not raise any red flags, how is this not a red flag, and there was more:

On April 24, Pagourtzis posted a photo of a handgun and a knife on Instagram.

Nikolas Cruz had set off enough red flags and  Adam Lanza, Ian David Long had a lot of signs he was not the full shilling.

How far does someone have to go before they should not be allowed near a gun? 

the authorities were aware of these mass shooters before they went on their killing spree. 

maybe there needs to be some more two and two's adding up to 4 instead of 3 when it comes to the mental health authorities and the police? 

Maybe the red flag should be lowered to a more realistic level,  as it seems they only reach red flag status after they have murdered lots of innocent people. 

 

[Habitat]

Plenty of "loose cannons" (perhaps not the best metaphor) out there, waiting for all the lemons to line up on the slot machine in their head, then ring-a-ding-ding, the shooting starts. Easily available firearms , you can't expect anything else.

[+susieice]

3 hours ago, freetoroam said:

Jeeze.

I am not sure i would call it lucky as such. Sure was not lucky to be at 2 different venues with a shooting,  extrememely fortunate to survive them both though. 

Without sounding disrespectful, i hope "third time lucky" does not occur. 

I was thinking that when I posted it. He was lucky to survive two. I also found a man who was at both and didn't survive this one. 

[+susieice]

8 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

It hasn't been tried yet.  We have as of yet had an incident where someone in a targeted group returned fire.  Except for one incident in Sutherland Springs where a neighbor opened up on the gunman.

But I wanted to look at stats.  They are always too easily forgotten.  We are the 3rd most populous nation in the world at 320 million.  Can you imagine any nation in Europe with that many?  Anyway, I believe that that I saw where there have been 347 killed in mass shootings this year alone?  That's something like 0.000001%.  Now compare that with the number of people that die from cancer and that is a number around 600k, that's almost 0.002%.  I'm not saying that mass shootings aren't important but I think we should put it in perspective.  And realize that it is simply a fabricated crisis to grab guns.  Does the media rush to hospitals and hospice to film the last breath of cancer victims?  Is their deaths any less or untimely than those shot?  More people die in car accidents.  None of it is good, but if you take away guns, people will use other means, cars, bombs, knives, poison, etc.  Using a gun will kill more efficiently, but it is also more of a stigma.  If there were no guns, more ill people would cross that line and kill fewer people per incident but it would probably add to more overall.

Everyday crime adds up to a lot more overall.

[freetoroam]

1 minute ago, susieice said:

I was thinking that when I posted it. He was lucky to survive two. I also found a man who was at both and didn't survive this one. 

The facey if for the man who did not survive.

What is strange is these are not regular occurances, so to have the two people at both is really odd. 

Mayby the men where friends and clubbed together, hence why they were at both places?