shooting in chicago

HiBC said:
An Air Force personnel was dishonorably discharged for domestic abuse.Isn't dishonorable discharge a checkbox on the 4473? So Domestic abuse and a dishonorable discharge.
Were there enough laws? How many more do you need?
The killer passed a NICS check and legally bought the gun. Was it an Air Force employee who screwed up? Was it the people who do NICS checks? It matters.
Click to expand...
You are referring to the Sutherland Springs church shooter. He wasn't just discharged. He was convicted at a court martial. Yes, the Air Force was required to report the conviction to NICS, and yes, at least one Air Force person failed to do their job and report him to NICS. That particular failure is on the Air Force, not the FBI (NICS).

But you are correct. Discussion at the time of that incident mentioned that there is no reason to enact new laws when the government can't be bothered to follow the laws they already have.
 
I want accountability. WHO made the decision he could buy the murder weapon and WHY?
Click to expand...

LOL, nobody makes that decision, not in the way you are thinking. The sales clerk at the gun store made that decision that the guns could be purchased. There was no failure to reject on the paperwork and so the business of the store is to sell product, the buyer wasn't knowingly disqualified, and so the decision was made to allow the sale to progress.

Beyond that, there are the various databases of the governments (civil, state and federal) that provide the information to say whether or not a person is disqualified from purchasing a gun through legal channels. 10s of 1000s of people have contributed/input information into the database. There isn't a functionary that makes a decision on every gun purchase. It is all automated. However, it isn't that permission is granted. It is that permission isn't denied.

So, it all comes down to the clerk at the store as to whether permission is granted or not, but the clerk's information to make said decision is limited by the information provided to the clerk by the government. That is the WHO and WHY.

So you think we should go after the sales clerks?
 
If one can easily see an incipient train wreck, and do nothing about it -- or worse enable it -- you bear no small modicum of responsibility.
Click to expand...

That's you opinion, but I think its a poor analogy, relying on too many "ifs".

What if I'm looking the other way when the train wrecks? What if I'm looking right at it, and did not realize it was going to wreck? Am I still responsible for not stopping the wreck??

Am I (or any of us) expected to be our brother's keeper, to make someone else feel better? Am I responsible if, someone else thinks I "knew or should have known"?

(especially if I didn't know??)

How far do we cast that net of blame or responsibility?? (as one example) are the cops who checked him out in 2019 and judged him no threat responsible for not stopping him committing mass murder in 2022???

How about the people who watched his videos? Did they "empower" him? Are they responsible and should be charged???

As far as I'm concerned, the person who does the killing is the person who did the killing. Period.
 
Why do people seem to think it so important what kind of trash talk the guy said online??? What matters is what HE DID. He shot and killed people.
Click to expand...

It's important because many of the scumbags who committed mass murders telegraphed their intent online. Yep, some scumbags back up their talk with action.
 
Yep, some scumbags back up their talk with action.
Click to expand...

And how many millions don't?? Every day?? And how are you going to tell the difference between someone gassing off and someone who is actually serious???

Can't say if its true, but I heard one of the Columbine killers had a webpage that was all sweetness and light, brotherhood, and can't we all just get along?"...

people are looking at what he posted, NOW, because the scumbag shot and killed people. Where were those people before he became a mass killer (and national news??)

my guess would be that, if they were anywhere, they were probably defending his first amendment right of free speech and "artistic expression".

How many of the people currently pointing to his online stuff and screaming "its right there!!! You knew!! you KNEW!!! and didn't stop him!" How many of those people would be saying something different if you asked them a month ago (before anyone was murdered)??

I think you'd get a majority of "sure its creepy, its dark, it's a bit worrisome, but its his art, and he's got a right to say it, even if it isn't popular"....

in my book, you don't get it both ways, unless you're a hypocrite.

Of course, if it weren't for double standards, some people would have no standards at all....:rolleyes:

The point here is that weird, creepy, and even "sick" people have the same legal rights to free expression, and even gun ownership, and every thing else that everyone does, UNTIL they break the law. At that point, things change. But until then, under our system, they have done no wrong, even if their point of view disgusts you, they have the legal right to say it.

if you think what they say is proof they will do bad things, ACT ON IT! Call the cops... (and see if they think you are right)...

I think, if you, personally, had reported the guy (because of his "evil" online stuff) and the cops disagreed and later on (years later???) he does become a killer, then you have the moral right to say "I told you so!, and you didn't believe me!!"

But, if you, personally, didn't, then I think you should shut the hell up about what you "allowed" to happen.....:rolleyes:
 
mehavey said:
Nope.

If one can easily see an incipient train wreck, and do nothing about it -- or worse enable it -- you bear no small modicum of responsibility.

That does not mean the murderer is any less guilty, and should bear full brunt of what what used to be the penalty for premeditated murder.

But others should also stand for judgement as well.
Click to expand...

I believe people are only responsible for their own actions and not the actions of others. If you witness someone stealing a car, for example, and do nothing about it, you did not steal the car.
 
I believe people are only responsible for their own actions and not the actions of others. If you witness someone stealing a car, for example, and do nothing about it, you did not steal the car.
Click to expand...

I will agree with this, generally, however, I do not think the law is entirely wrong when it charges people who willingly and directly participated in a crime with a murder charge when someone is killed during the commission of the crime.

The common example is the getaway driver who 'did nothing' but sit in the car. Now, maybe the guy didn't pull the trigger, BUT he was involved, and especially if he drove the killer away, then i think the charge of accessory is appropriate.

Of course there is a huge difference between just seeing something happen and being an active part of it. All the difference in the world, actually...
 
It's ironic that some members of this site seem to be of the opinion that "the authorities" (or someone) should have seen and acted on the shooter's malevolent posts. As 44 AMP points out, there are thousands of troubled people in this world who post "dark" and potentially disturbing things every day, and who never act on them.

Meanwhile, how many of us who have carry permits and who carry regularly are of the opinion (and have even posted here) that "My gun is to protect me and my family. I'm not going to butt into someone else's fight"?
 
I believe the concern is less for any lack formal action by "the authorities," as it is by the continuing slide of a society's
willingness to ignore deeply troubling (if not deadly) conduct by its members... only to wring hands after the fact and
weep "ain't it awful ! "

Any social structure is eventually judged by how well it operated to the advantage -- and safety -- of its members.
'My brother's keeper' notwithstanding, something is going very wrong with that society's development of, and sense
of responsibility for, our rising generations of late -- especially dangerous in the case of our young males.

.
 
Last edited:
I can not help but think we can take major steps to protecting our children when we stop thinking the government can do it. The government can not protect your children, period. Once that part of the conversation is taken off the table, then a solution that might work can be started on. Right now I am pinning my hopes on the midterms, but I damn sure am not betting the farm on it. We need to fix stupid first.
 
something is going very wrong with that society's development of, and sense
of responsibility for, our rising generations of late...
Click to expand...

Without trying to send this thread too far off the rails,...

Look what the current generations of our youth are constantly hearing (almost literally everywhere) and what they are, in some cases, actually being instructed in at their schools.

Among other things are that traditional values are evil, America is evil, men are evil, the world owes them a living, but that won't matter, because corporate greed has destroyed the world and it will be unlivable in a few years....and on, and on, and on

Social media functions as an echo chamber an amplifier for that, and icing on the cake, every time you watch "entertainment" it's nearly always people shooting people to solve their problems. 24/7

what we have today is what I call a Mein Kampf situation. Though if I say that out loud virtually everyone immediately jumps to the wrong conclusion, assuming I'm promoting Nazism. I'm not. What I'm pointing out is lost on nearly everyone, because almost no one alive today has actually read the book.

I have. It an absolute masterpiece of interlocking arguments each supporting the others, so well it is believable, UNLESS you have some degree of real world experience showing you how its all based on lies.

And that's where we, as a society, have put today's youth, in a situation where they are constantly being fed "the big lie" (and lots of smaller ones), and they have no (or not enough) real life experience to be able to recognize, let alone counter the effect.

Young men are particularly vulnerable due to biology. Been there, myself. Raging hormones creating very strong emotions, both good AND bad. without a strong support structure the bad often rules. And that support structure has been stripped away from most due to "progressive" ideas.
Teach kids that nothing matters but what they want, that all their parents ideals are evil, and that the world is ending soon, and what do you expect to get?

Pretty much what we've gotten. Not everyone, of course, but even a tiny fraction of a percentage is enough to make the news 24/7. And, it seems the only things that displaces coverage of a mass killing from the headlines is another mass killing...and yes, I blame the people who sell us the news, for that, AND its predictable effect.

The counter culture radicals of the 60s are mostly retired now, but they had their shot at being in the driver's seat and setting up a system based on their beliefs. Their indoctrinated children are the older adults in charge now. and from what I see have been carrying on the "good works":rolleyes: their parents advocated, even expanding on them. Those 60s radicals weren't entirely wrong, there were things about the US at that time that did need to be changed. And, by and large, we have changed them. But those radicals were far from being entirely right, about most things, and now, we get to see the results of what they put in motion.

So, what's the answer? Be a rigidly controlling autocracy, to ensure everyone "stays in line" so we will "be safe"???

Or accept that with liberty and freedom comes individual choice and without a sense of responsibility some people ARE going to make bad choices...

Punishing everyone for the bad acts of a few only works in certain situations, and we're constantly told we shouldn't do that, about anyone's choices, unless that choice is to be a gun owner, it seems. If that's not hypocrisy on a grand scale, please, show me what is....
 
When Italian gang (Capone) members (dressed as cops) executed 7 members of the Irish gang (Bugsy Moran) using shotguns and 2 Thompson machine guns, the public was horrified. 7 dead was considered a massacre in those innocent days. Valentines day, 1929.

Criminals using automatic weapons became such a problem that the National Firearms Act was established in 1934. This focused on automatic weapons, sawed off shotguns, short barrel rifles, brass knuckles (yeah, brass knuckles) and knife-guns (like a pistol with a knife welded on it.) All the stuff those gangsters were using. Don't forget, at that time these were the "dirty immigrants."

Well, since being highly regulated under the NFA, there have not been any machine gun related killings for about 6 decades or more, I believe.

Now, as for the statement that the Government can not keep your kids safe... they regulate food safety because from 1900 to 1925 there were large outbreaks of food poisoning. The FDA keeps food and drugs safe. The Thalidomide tragedy in the 1950's and 60's was doctors widely using a drug not approved by the fda for use in pregnant women resulting in thousands of tragic birth defects. Pregnancy was raised as an important distinction when prescribing drugs. The government sponsors the US Military, which certainly protect our kids and us too. It inspects bridges and elevators and on and on- not because it wants to.. but because there is some tragedy where by error or greed the public is harmed.

For some reason, kids in other countries are safer than our kids. The numbers are striking. That's not even considering the gap we have in wealth. Something is different between us and the other countries.

Instead of thumping chests an proclaiming ourselves 'the best', there are a lot of smart guys here that should be thinking 'how can we be better.'
 
stinkeypete said:
Well, since being highly regulated under the NFA, there have not been any machine gun related killings for about 6 decades or more, I believe.
Click to expand...

I think that claim needs some expansion along the lines of "legally owned machine gun" and "criminal killings".

Pretty sure that there has been at least one murder with illegal automatic weapons.
With the number of police departments that have some form of M16/M4 that are classed as machine guns even if not fired on automatic there may have been some police involved shootings that may qualify as written.
 
This family manufactured a monster and armed him.
Click to expand...

that's your opinion, and you're welcome to it. Personally, I think you're giving the parents too much credit, and the "monster" not enough for what he became.

Lots of children come from bad homes where the parents argue, fight, and even have substance abuse issues, and don't become monsters.

And some children come from homes with wealth and every possible social advantage accruing from that, and become monsters, anyway.

Remember also that this particular monster was legally an adult with a clean record, just not quite old enough to meet the Illinois requirement of being 21 to obtain a state FOID card. Had he lived in a different state, that requirement would not have applied, under existing law at the time he was of legal age to purchase a rifle.

You say "armed him", which, I think is misleading. As I understand it from what has been reported, his parents (Father in particular) did not put a rifle in his hands, or give him ammunition, HE did that, on his own. He got his father to give permission for him to apply for the FOID, but that's a far cry from giving him a gun, ammo, and saying "go shoot some people".

what we are looking at here is the highly subjective and speculative concepts of "knew or should have known" and also the age old debate about "nature vs, Nurture". I am in the camp that people do evil things because they CHOOSE to. And, personally, I don't really care much why they chose to, it changes NOTHING about what they did.

The people he killed are still dead. Their families lives irrevocably shattered. I will shed not one crocodile tear (or any other kind) because the killer had "bad parents".

The Menendez brothers were convicted of murdering their parents. They said they were abused. The state said they did it to get the $14million their parents were worth. Eventually a jury agreed with the state.

All of these killers have reasons. some MIGHT make sense to us, I suspect most only make sense to themselves. Either way, it doesn't change what they did, or that they chose to do it.

If you've got evidence that his parents taught him, trained him, or even just encouraged him to commit murder, please produce it. If they actually did any of those things, then yes, absolutely they should be called out for it, and face the legal consequences. Absent that evidence, is it right to blame them for something their son chose to do on his own?

I don't think so, but, that's just my opinion.
 
If you've got evidence that his parents taught him, trained him, or even just encouraged him to commit murder, please produce it. If they actually did any of those things, then yes, absolutely they should be called out for it, and face the legal consequences. Absent that evidence, is it right to blame them for something their son chose to do on his own?
Click to expand...

The kid made homicidal and suicidal threats that led to the police confiscating his knife collection. A year later the father signed the FOID card. And the kid's behavior during the time between those events included glorifying violence in his music and social media activity.

Holding the father responsible for that choice does not excuse his son's behavior.
 
I'm going to double-down on my Post 69

Given what we are seeing as trend/development in our young males we don't have enough prisons, psych wards or "ultimate penalties" to handle the problem.
(and simplistically "outlawing" the instrument itself is laughable if it weren't so pitiful in its thinking)

What's going on in the cities is prologue -- now leaking into the outskirts.
Trouble in River City as the social tsunami's easliy seen rolling upstream.
 
The kid made homicidal and suicidal threats that led to the police confiscating his knife collection. A year later the father signed the FOID card. And the kid's behavior during the time between those events included glorifying violence in his music and social media activity.
Click to expand...

we covered this. Confiscating "dangerous weapons" (temporarily) is police SOP any time they are called into a potentially dangerous situation. its a standard precaution, which may, or may not later be found to have been necessary. DO note that the police returned the knives that night to the father who said they were his. They didn't find a credible threat, the knives were returned.

The "kid" glorified violence in his music? ok, sure. First off, NOT a crime, even if distasteful. Second, glorifying violence is what Hollywood and the rest of our entertainment industry has been doing for longer than both of us have been alive, put together. It makes MONEY.

LOTS of money. Can't hardly fault a wanna be rap artist from trying to get on that gravy train.

there are people who are fans of Black Sabbath music that don't actually worship the devil, you know....
 
We can talk about Adrenal, marijuana, record keeping, and Mein Kampf all day long. This family manufactured a monster and armed him. IMHO as a gun rights community we absolutely have to call them out for that.
Click to expand...

This sounds a little too much like attempting to force a set of values on people. I got enough of that in college (University of Colorado at Boulder, as a 32-35 year old. Not easy for someone who leans to the right and was active duty at the time). Different people have different values. Not all families are perfect, most are far from it. How many kids grow up with parents whose values mean that they stay in a marriage when they can't stand to be around one another? I'd argue that is just as damaging to a kid as parents who fight and then separate. I understand the point you are trying to make, but holding anyone but him responsible for what he did and trying to push a set of values on people who have different values than you is not really what I would call freedom.
 
This sounds a little too much like attempting to force a set of values on people. I got enough of that in college (University of Colorado at Boulder, as a 32-35 year old. Not easy for someone who leans to the right and was active duty at the time). Different people have different values. Not all families are perfect, most are far from it. How many kids grow up with parents whose values mean that they stay in a marriage when they can't stand to be around one another? I'd argue that is just as damaging to a kid as parents who fight and then separate. I understand the point you are trying to make, but holding anyone but him responsible for what he did and trying to push a set of values on people who have different values than you is not really what I would call freedom.
Click to expand...

That is fair, and I've spent some time working in academia with active duty students and veterans. You certainly endured some attempts at indoctrination and I apologize for my approach.

My point is that the shooter in this case checked pretty much every box for having the potential to become what he became. Yet his father signed the FOID card, I think that was a decision that warrants civil penalties and social scorn at the very least.

there are people who are fans of Black Sabbath music that don't actually worship the devil, you know....
Click to expand...

And I've been one of them since Ozzy could complete a sentence.

Honest question though- do you think there should be any consequences for the father signing the FOID?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top