Another nut goes on a rampage

gyvel

New member
As of today, yet another nut has gone on a killing rampage after making the announcement via YouTube.

Looks like Elliot Rodger is another one who has slipped through the cracks in our mental health care system.

Obviously this isn't going to bode well for our cause, only giving the antis another excuse to capitalize on the ensuing emotional reactions to further their cause.

Sometimes it seems like we can't win.
 
He killed six, and at least three of those were by stabbing and one or more others by running them down with his fawncy BMW. So far the news has concentrated only on the shootings.

But the media doesn't have a bias. "We only report the facts."
 
Some time ago Rodger's father reported him the police. The father was concerned about YouTube videos where his son talked about murder and suicide. The police investigated, Rodgers smoozed them and no action was taken. There are reports that the police stated that Rodgers had no guns.


Yep, it's fashionable for folks on gun boards to blame the media when someone goes bonkers with a gun. This rampage has been widely reported on the three major news networks i've watched. All are saying Rodgers murdered folks with knives and guns and that he hit some folks with his car. Six or seven folks are in serious condition due to gunshots and being run over.
 
Last edited:
Some time ago Rodger's father reported him the police. The father was concerned about YouTube videos where his son talked about murder and suicide.

Representative Tim Murphy has submitted a Bill that would make involuntary treatment programs much easier. The Bill has some bi-partisan support, but in an election year it may be difficult for it to go anywhere.

Obviously involuntary treatment has potential civil rights concerns, but there is some evidence that it works. A Duke University study looked at programs that already compel some level of treatment and found that they reduced the likelihood of ending up back in the hospital or jail along with reduced cost.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/03/health/mental-health-groups-split-on-bill-to-revamp-care.html?_r=0
 
This happened in an unfriendly state. There are plenty of nuts in the friendly states and I would dare say more so then places like California, however, what keeps them at bay is the thought that anyone might be carrying. This wouldnt happen in Kentucky. No way.
 
This happened in an unfriendly state. There are plenty of nuts in the friendly states and I would dare say more so then places like California, however, what keeps them at bay is the thought that anyone might be carrying. This wouldnt happen in Kentucky. No way.


There's no evidence whatsoever that the presence or absence of potential armed resistance prevents these crimes.
 
This wouldnt happen in Kentucky. No way.

I suggest you do a little research. Start with Joseph Wesbecker, and Louisville.

It can happen anywhere.

And the "reasons" are as individual as the nut jobs who do it.
 
A suicidal mental case who's bent on murder and mayhem will not be deterred by the unlikely possibility of encountering an armed citizen.
 
AB, maybe you should find a different media outlet. I listened to local news last night and two networks this morning, all are reporting the same details: Stabbed 3, shot over a dozen others three of whom died, and hit two cyclists. Here's the first paragraph from the NY Times article:

ISLA VISTA, Calif. — A college student who posted videos that documented his rage against women for rejecting him killed six people and wounded 13 others during a spasm of terror on Friday night, the police said. He stabbed three men to death in his apartment and shot the others as he methodically opened fire on bystanders on the crowded streets of this small town.

Here's the second paragraph:
The gunman, identified by the police as Elliot O. Rodger, 22, was found dead with a bullet wound to his head after his black BMW crashed into a parked car following two shootouts with sheriff’s deputies near the University of California, Santa Barbara. The police said he had apparently taken his own life. Three semiautomatic handguns, along with 41 loaded 10-round magazines — all bought legally at local gun stores — were found in his car.

You can call that anti-gun media bias if you like, I would tend to call it facts. Not sure why the impulse to blame the media when some nut uses a gun to fulfill his fantasies. What do you expect them to report?

As for one victim's father who is blaming "craven politicians and the NRA", that's his opinion and he has a right to express it. Given the situation and his emotional state, I think the best course of action for gun advocates right now is to shut up and let him vent. Yes, the antis and politicians will try to capitalize on it, but I don't think there's much we can do about that right now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We are better off arguing that carry might mitigate or reduce the killing as compared to deterring them.

We have too many cases of rampages in gun friendly states and specifically in gun rich environments (courthouses, police stations) to make a strong case for deterrence.

One has a hard time proving a negative but I don't think we see a clear differential in rates based on carry.
 
There's no evidence whatsoever that the presence or absence of potential armed resistance prevents these crimes.

There is, however, very strong evidence that the presence of armed resistance ends these crimes -- mostly by the attacker killing himself at the first sign of meaningful resistance (that usually includes, but is not limited to, armed resistance).

Here's one illustration of such, from Sgt. Chuck Haggard in 2008:

Chuck Haggard said:
As I crossed the porch I could see the shooter through the front door, I went "guns up" on him as I moved forward. He saw me at the same time and ducked to my left, the door frame blocking my view of him. He saw me so quickly as he had been scanning, I believe for the female's sister who had gone into a closet and was hiding. I pushed hard and fast, "pieing" the door as I went, hoping to get a slice of the shooter and to open fire as soon as I had a piece of him available to shoot. I did not need to as the shooter fired a shot into his own head.

Active shooter events that end earlier, also produce lower body counts. And sometimes, if ended early enough, the event does not fall into the larger category at all... even though it would have if meaningful resistance hadn't ended it.

Also see the FBI report about Active Shooter Events from 2000-2012, which was published in January 2014.

pax
 
I did say that being armed reduces the harm has compared to deterring it, so that's a good point.

The point about suicide brings up a subtle point. Many of these folks (40% in some estimates) do commit suicide. It's part of their plan. They intend to inflict harm to make a message and then die what they think is a warror's death.

If they plan to die, being deterred isn't high in their mind. They kill the first wave and then die.

I always argue for being able to respond efficaciously to the shooter as my main point.
 
I always argue for being able to respond efficaciously to the shooter as my main point.

Really the only point there is to have.

Lets face it, if a person is bent on committing suicide and taking out as many people as he/she can prior to doing so, what is there left to do but to take this person out as quickly as possible? Further, it doesn't matter if the suicidal individual is using a firearm, knives, a vehicle or explosives as their means of a weapon. This person has to be shut down ASAP. The faster the threat is eliminated, the more innocent lives are spared.

This really isn't 'brain surgery' here. Simply, common sense.

But the anti-gun community(severely lacking any common sense) will continue to use every one of these horrible incidents to do nothing but try and further promote their own narrow-minded agendas trying to sell to the public the fantasy that if there is some kind of law passed completely eliminating all firearms from this country, villians will obey this law and not have them. Or that these mass murder scenario's and firearm crimes in general will miraculously stop.

God forbid that I ever find myself caught up in the middle of one of these situations. But if I am, I surely hope I never find myself standing there totally defenseless.
 
I wanted to add the father is now blaming "guns" when it was quite a bit more then that. There were obvious mental health issues and he had a responsibility to get this man help. Obviously, the family should look within themselves and ask what they could have done with this impaired individual.
 
I read some of this guy's manifesto about women.

Very twisted.Extreme sexually oriented hate for women.

Along with the narcissistic idea that he is a prize.

I certainly do not intend to put any positive spin on this tragedy

But,had he not snapped and gone on a rampage,likely we would have been dealing with a horrific serial killer.He did demonstrate (allegedly) that he will kill with a knife.

I am disgusted by the exploitation of tragedy; the "If it bleeds,it leads"degeneration of media and politics.I am disgusted with those who dance with glee in the blood puddles ..."never let a crisis go to waste"
 
Obviously, the family should look within themselves and ask what they could have done with this impaired individual.

The father called the police about his sons disturbing YouTube videos. The police investigated, said the son was not into guns and dropped the matter.

The shooter was being treated by multiple doctors. By some accounts he refused to take his meds. The son was a 22 year old adult: Not much the parents could do.

From Rodgers 137 page manifesto:

The Final Phase of the Day of Retribution will be my ultimate showdown in the streets of Isla Vista.

On the morning before, I will drive down to my father’s house to kill my little brother, denying him of the chance to grow up to surpass me, along with my stepmother … as she will be in the way. My father will be away on one of his business trips, so thankfully I won’t have to deal with him.

If he didn’t go away on that trip, I might even have to postpone the whole plan because of my fear that I might hesitate if I have to kill him. Once I’ve taken care of my brother and stepmother, I will switch over to the Mercedes SUV, and drive it back up to Isla Vista. I will use it as one of my killing machines against my enemies. An SUV will cause a lot more damage than my BMW coupe.

After I have killed all of the sorority girls at the Alpha Phi House, I will quickly get into the SUV before the police arrive, assuming they would arrive within 3 minutes.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-isla-vista-document-20140524-story.html#page=1
 
The main "thrust" of the news reports are how one victims father is tearfully blaming the NRA for his child being killed. They mention the knife murders and the car murder, but I have yet to hear anyone tearfully blame Detroit or Cold Steel.
 
Given the situation and his emotional state, I think the best course of action for gun advocates right now is to shut up and let him vent. Yes, the antis and politicians will try to capitalize on it, but I don't think there's much we can do about that right now.
I agree. We don't need LaPierre ranting about good guys with guns. That little soundbite gets thrown back in our face every time there's a shooting.

What I would point out is how the media fetishism about these shooters seems to create copycats. Let's be honest: several children will be shot to deat in the projects of Chicago this weekend. They've had over 140 firearms homicides this year alone, and we never hear about it.

The difference? This is an affluent child of a Hollywood director, and he's shooting well-to-do suburbanites. I guess it makes for better press.

In any case, we don't come out ahead using this as a platform for arguing gun rights in any way. Anything we say will be twisted to portray us as callous and unsympathetic. We've already had enough bad press lately.
 
Back
Top