View Full Version : Another Shooting - Mass Murder - Santa Barbara, CA
Developing story: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/05/24/at-least-7-dead-in-shootings-in-santa-barbara-area/
A lawyer for a Hollywood director says he suspects his son carried out a mass shooting near the University of California, Santa Barbara campus late Friday that left seven people dead, including the gunman, and 11 injured in what authorities say was a “premeditated mass murder.”
Looks like parents warned LE in advance. From first link:
Shifman says the director's family called police several weeks ago after being alarmed by YouTube videos "regarding suicide and the killing of people."
The lawyer said police conducted an investigation and interviewed the young man. Shifman said police did not find a history of guns, but did say the man had trouble making friends.
Looks like parents warned LE in advance. From first link:
Shifman says the director's family called police several weeks ago after being alarmed by YouTube videos "regarding suicide and the killing of people."
The lawyer said police conducted an investigation and interviewed the young man. Shifman said police did not find a history of guns, but did say the man had trouble making friends.
WTF is a "history of guns"? History of violent behavior, history of mental illness, etc is what matters. Ugh. So first we have "gun violence" and now "history of guns"? Let's hope the latter does not become the new media sound bite as the former did.
WTF is a "history of guns"? History of violent behavior, history of mental illness, etc is what matters. Ugh. So first we have "gun violence" and now "history of guns"? Let's hope the latter does not become the new media sound bite as the former did.
I'm seeing this in several reports-"history of guns". What-the guy said he was going to kill others and because he didn't have a history of owning guns he was determined to be a sane, fine, upstanding young man? And someone else had said in a news report that "it's hard to predict when these things will happen" or something like that. For God's sake, the guy posted that he was going to do it-what more predictions do you need?!!
The parents had gone to the police, pleading with them to do something, and showed them NUMEROUS nut-job videos he had made.
Good job police.
The parents had gone to the police, pleading with them to do something, and showed them NUMEROUS nut-job videos he had made.
Good job police.
How do we blame the police for that? What can they legally do? You know the drill here, they can't (legally) nor will they, arrest every angry kid who says dumb shit on the 'net. 1 in a million or so times, POS kid actually means it and does it. There's surprisingly little the police can do until after the crime is committed, hence the known catch 22 of our legal system. We don't have all the facts to know what, if any, legit signs they have overlooked, or didn't. Let's hold off on the accusations 'till we have something go on, or are media reports good enough now? Go search YT, there's 10 zillion nut jobs on there making vids. Per usual, Free Speech is not free and also has its costs.
What should we do with this guy? I'd bet $$$ he's a potential threat to women, worse the the kid above:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBYRhcbKRac
Moose-Knuckle
05-24-14, 19:07
What should we do with this guy? I'd bet $$$ he's a potential threat to women, worse the the kid above:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBYRhcbKRac
People disappear all the time never to be heard from again . . . just say'n these things happen.
The mechanism this degenerate used to kill innocent people will be the focus of the media for some time. If he took flight lessons and crashed an airplane into a college dorm, the media coverage would die down much more quickly.
I am not sure what the police could have done to stop this turd. When more information about the pre-incident investigation is released and how California law applies, we will have a better idea about what the police could have done. At least the parents took steps to try to stop this from happening, which says something about the parents.
Too bad the little shit didn't go out in the woods and shoot himself instead of involving other people in his warped plan.
Couldn't he have been atleast taken in for psych evaluation?
Couldn't he have been atleast taken in for psych evaluation?
This may have been done. I don't think the police will be able to release this type of information due to HIPPA restrictions related to medical records obtained by a subpoena, but the media may be able to dig something up.
Always be on your toes when you leave your house. Another kid like the turd who pulled off this attack could be in your area planning the same thing.
Couldn't he have been atleast taken in for psych evaluation?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5150_(Involuntary_psychiatric_hold)
I would think the YouTube videos would qualify him for California's involuntary hold.
Unless something is different in California for some reason there would not be any restrictions on confirming that a police initiated detention and eval occurred. The content and findings of said eval is a different story. At any rate I haven't read anything to suggest that such an event occurred but thats not to say he wasn't receiving or had received some sort of treatment in the past. I haven't seen any suggestion of either though.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
The fact that young of a kid is driving a nice size new BMW says something. Spoiled and self centered. Didn't happen by accident. Perhaps if he was kept busy earning his own way he would be more likable and empathetic toward others.
If the parents were worried they could have taken away some of the means to do mass murder: keys, allowance, etc.
The kid is totally responsible but few if any of these young mass shooters are working two jobs, doing volunteer work, coaching kids, etc. they typically are left alone unsupervised with no chores or job and excess money to acquire weapons and other equipment.
How do we blame the police for that? What can they legally do? You know the drill here, they can't (legally) nor will they, arrest every angry kid who says dumb shit on the 'net. 1 in a million or so times, POS kid actually means it and does it. There's surprisingly little the police can do until after the crime is committed, hence the known catch 22 of our legal system. We don't have all the facts to know what, if any, legit signs they have overlooked, or didn't. Let's hold off on the accusations 'till we have something go on, or are media reports good enough now? Go search YT, there's 10 zillion nut jobs on there making vids. Per usual, Free Speech is not free and also has its costs.
I agree with you. We want the police and Gov to do this or that... BUT... we don't want them infringing on our rights to be who we want to be.
We as grown adults...parents...productive members of society just have to be on our toes. Go to the extent we need to in getting people help, reporting the signs and hope for the best.
Sucks that we have to accept this way of life, but we are dealing with exactly what we as a society has created.
sinlessorrow
05-24-14, 20:42
3 handguns with compliant mags....I doubt we will hear of any form of ban talking.
3 handguns with compliant mags....I doubt we will hear of any form of ban talking.
2 shot mags?
Remember, this is Kalif. we are speaking of. We must close the gate after the milk producers left town.
ForTehNguyen
05-24-14, 21:02
stabbed 3 at apartment complex, ran over some people with car, shot few others
http://www.keyt.com/news/College-town-mass-murder-leaves-7-dead/26153616
Somebody in Cali please answer - couldn't the parents have committed him with their consent? I'll bet they are wishing they had.
Somebody in Cali please answer - couldn't the parents have committed him with their consent? I'll bet they are wishing they had.
If Elliot Rodger is 22 years of age, probably not.
Moose-Knuckle
05-24-14, 22:00
Mainstream media queue grieving parent blaming the NRA in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . .
http://news.yahoo.com/tearful-plea-victims-dad-deadly-rampage-233719408.html
The fact that young of a kid is driving a nice size new BMW says something.
And complaining that "life isn't fair." This is where all those "participation" ribbons get you. When you are raised being told you are as much a winner as everyone else and find out differently it can be difficult.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeAy0aQxxOU
The fact that young of a kid is driving a nice size new BMW says something. Spoiled and self centered. Didn't happen by accident. Perhaps if he was kept busy earning his own way he would be more likable and empathetic toward others.
If the parents were worried they could have taken away some of the means to do mass murder: keys, allowance, etc.
The kid is totally responsible but few if any of these young mass shooters are working two jobs, doing volunteer work, coaching kids, etc. they typically are left alone unsupervised with no chores or job and excess money to acquire weapons and other equipment.
Well said!!!! Best statement I've read so far about this current issue that is plaguing our culture.
To be honest this guys rants seem almost fake, the sad thing is that they are real.
What is wrong with people in this Age?
brushy bill
05-24-14, 22:47
Mainstream media queue grieving parent blaming the NRA in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . .
http://news.yahoo.com/tearful-plea-victims-dad-deadly-rampage-233719408.html
Too bad we don't have an intellectually honest media who would question how in any way gun laws would have prevented this. As I'm understanding this, there were murders with knives, the car, and the guns were restricted capacity handguns that were legally acquired. Without a total ban and door-to-door confiscation, what would they propose?
sinlessorrow
05-24-14, 22:59
Too bad we don't have an intellectually honest media who would question how in any way gun laws would have prevented this. As I'm understanding this, there were murders with knives, the car, and the guns were restricted capacity handguns that were legally acquired. Without a total ban and door-to-door confiscation, what would they propose?
Yes and no. He killed 3 at his apartment with a knife, then ran over a few bikers who all survived, and then shot 16 people in which 3 died and 13 were injured.
SilverBullet432
05-24-14, 23:15
Mainstream media queue grieving parent blaming the NRA in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . .
http://news.yahoo.com/tearful-plea-victims-dad-deadly-rampage-233719408.html
Lets ban spoons! They contribute to heart disease! Also: RIP to the victims. (Not the killer) Although he DID need help, WHICH THEY IGNORED! I can't see how the father can blame the gun. It just infuriates me!
I guess the police could have gotten IVC orders, involuntary commitment orders, or the parents could have. But if he would have said no I am good I was just mad when I made those. Police should have left right, or they could have used force and detained him and transported him to the hospital for an evaluation. But then we might have another thread like this https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?152624-What-constitutional-rights.
Mainstream media queue grieving parent blaming the NRA in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . .
http://news.yahoo.com/tearful-plea-victims-dad-deadly-rampage-233719408.html
Like father, like son. No accepting any responsibility, blaming outsiders like the NRA and politicians, for the actions of his son. No shitty parenting, no overindulgence, no lack of preparing your child for the real world...it's all the NRAs fault.
Too bad we don't have an intellectually honest media who would question how in any way gun laws would have prevented this. As I'm understanding this, there were murders with knives, the car, and the guns were restricted capacity handguns that were legally acquired. Without a total ban and door-to-door confiscation, what would they propose?
Mental health records check, and denial of firearms purchase for those with severe mental illness.
If you were to devise a family life to perfectly nurture narcism would it differ much from this spoiled kid's? And what to narcissists do besides dwell on themselves? Blame others. Like "every blonde", the NRA, chunks of metal, anyone and anything but themselves.
If you were to devise a family life to perfectly nurture narcism would it differ much from this spoiled kid's? And what to narcissists do besides dwell on themselves? Blame others. Like "every blonde", the NRA, chunks of metal, anyone and anything but themselves.
Yep, and usually they confine themselves to shitting on people they don't believe measure up, screwing over others for fun and profit (those people deserve to be victims for not knowing better) and otherwise seeing the entire world and everyone in it as something that exists for THEM.
And God forbid, if people don't line up and start catering to their every want, need and desire...then THEY become the victim and will make the entire world pay for their inconvenience.
The ONLY good thing to come out of this is Elliot Rodger is ****ing dead and we won't have to suffer his existence any longer. We won't have to feed, clothe or devote endless hours of psychological evaluation to determine why he is such a fuktard.
Maybe, just maybe a few of the other millions of other parents who are fostering their own little self absorbed violent shits with a similar capacity will take notice. It's a shame Elliot didn't take a page from Lanza and check his parents out first, I mean surely they failed to provide him a world full of hot women who wanted him.
Maybe the fact that Elliot OOOZED contempt for everyone, and probably especially women, is why he had lady troubles. If you are in CA, your Dad is a famous Hollywood type, you drive a BMW and you still can't get laid...YOU are definitely the problem.
Somebody in Cali please answer - couldn't the parents have committed him with their consent? I'll bet they are wishing they had.
If he made videos expressing a desire or plan to harm people, yes.
Here is how it works in the vast majority of (probably all) states. The parents simply go to a magistrate or some equivalent and present their concern / supporting evidence to get an involuntary commitment order. The burden of proof is usually very low at this point. Simply telling the magistrate that their son has made threats that he plans to carry out using x means gets a signed commitment order.
Once the magistrate signs a commitment order, this compels local LE to detain the person and deliver them to a treatment facility for an initial evaluation. This is almost always the local emergency department where the detainee is medically screened by an emergency physician who also performs a focused psychiatric assessment of with the assistance of psychiatric social workers. An actual psychiatrist is very rarely involved at this point unless the emergency department is an academic center with psychiatric residents who are in training.
After performing their focused assessment, the emergency physician will make a determination as to uphold the original commitment order or terminate the proceedings if the initial allegations were bogus. Usually we uphold the initial commitment order and document our supportive findings in what is typically called a First Exam Findings.
This First Exam paperwork allows the patient to be further detained for 1-7 days (depending on the state) for further psychiatric evaluation at a dedicated psychiatric facility. These First Exam Findings are reviewed by a judge and the detainee has legal representation, but it is fairly hard to overturn a well documented First Exam. What happens next varies from state to state, but it is common for psychiatric facilities to extend the detention through the proper legal channels as long as the patient is a threat.
A very important aspect of this process is the part where a judge reviews the First Exam Findings. If the judge upholds those finding, then the detainee has been deemed mentally defective for the purpose of filling out Form 4473, Question 11f, and should be unable to purchase a gun. The initial commitment order signed by the magistrate is not as big of a deal for firearms provided that the treating emergency physician terminated the proceedings in their First Exam. My state of NC has licensing requirements for handgun purchases and part of the background check looks for First Exams that were upheld by a judge.
Moose-Knuckle
05-25-14, 02:03
I guess the police could have gotten IVC orders, involuntary commitment orders, or the parents could have. But if he would have said no I am good I was just mad when I made those. Police should have left right, or they could have used force and detained him and transported him to the hospital for an evaluation. But then we might have another thread like this https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?152624-What-constitutional-rights.
The difference is in the OP of that thread the subject in question was a possible threat to herself. In this case the "kid" was making threats of mass murder. The parents could have contacted the courts and petitioned for a mental health warrant so their son could be taken into protective custody and evaluated by mental health professionals. Instead they contacted LE which can not really do anything until Jr. had committed a crime, past tense.
Ouroborous
05-25-14, 02:07
If you are in CA, your Dad is a famous Hollywood type, you drive a BMW and you still can't get laid...YOU are definitely the problem.
This. My condolences to the families of those who were killed. Let's get real here though-- quit pointing fingers at politicians and the NRA and start looking at how we deal with mental illness in this country. Likewise, if the gun laws weren't so screwed up in the state, a responsible citizen could have protected themselves against this dirtbag.
The fact that young of a kid is driving a nice size new BMW says something. Spoiled and self centered.
What?
I'm 23 and own a 2012 Jeep Wrangler, night vision, multiple rifles, and have a furnished apartment: all without being in debt.
What does that say about me?
Someone's age or possessions has absolutely no relevance on the character of the individual. I guarantee I work with 20 year old's who are better men than the vast majority of 30-something's in our country.
This incident is going to renew the focus by politicians about access to mental health records.
If he made videos expressing a desire or plan to harm people, yes.
Here is how it works in the vast majority of (probably all) states. The parents simply go to a magistrate or some equivalent and present their concern / supporting evidence to get an involuntary commitment order. The burden of proof is usually very low at this point. Simply telling the magistrate that their son has made threats that he plans to carry out using x means gets a signed commitment order.
Once the magistrate signs a commitment order, this compels local LE to detain the person and deliver them to a treatment facility for an initial evaluation. This is almost always the local emergency department where the detainee is medically screened by an emergency physician who also performs a focused psychiatric assessment of with the assistance of psychiatric social workers. An actual psychiatrist is very rarely involved at this point unless the emergency department is an academic center with psychiatric residents who are in training.
After performing their focused assessment, the emergency physician will make a determination as to uphold the original commitment order or terminate the proceedings if the initial allegations were bogus. Usually we uphold the initial commitment order and document our supportive findings in what is typically called a First Exam Findings.
This First Exam paperwork allows the patient to be further detained for 1-7 days (depending on the state) for further psychiatric evaluation at a dedicated psychiatric facility. These First Exam Findings are reviewed by a judge and the detainee has legal representation, but it is fairly hard to overturn a well documented First Exam. What happens next varies from state to state, but it is common for psychiatric facilities to extend the detention through the proper legal channels as long as the patient is a threat.
A very important aspect of this process is the part where a judge reviews the First Exam Findings. If the judge upholds those finding, then the detainee has been deemed mentally defective for the purpose of filling out Form 4473, Question 11f, and should be unable to purchase a gun. The initial commitment order signed by the magistrate is not as big of a deal for firearms provided that the treating emergency physician terminated the proceedings in their First Exam. My state of NC has licensing requirements for handgun purchases and part of the background check looks for First Exams that were upheld by a judge.
To add to this some states are even less burdensome. For instance in my home state all that is required for an emergency detention to be carried out is for a community designee (e.g. LMSW, Psych RN, pastor even) to sign off on said pick up order which the police then act upon and deliver the individual to the closest emergency center for crisis eval. The ER docs have the final say regarding a 72 hour involuntary commitment period at this point but every case gets consulted on with the on call psychiatrist. The only time the courts ever really get involved is following a patients legal status being converted to a 2PC (30-60 days) and patient challenges it. My state sucks in the sense that at this point they allow the treating physician to simultaneously fill the role of forensic evaluator ass well, but that's neither here nor there.
The difference is in the OP of that thread the subject in question was a possible threat to herself. In this case the "kid" was making threats of mass murder. The parents could have contacted the courts and petitioned for a mental health warrant so their son could be taken into protective custody and evaluated by mental health professionals. Instead they contacted LE which can not really do anything until Jr. had committed a crime, past tense.
Yes the can in the event that they while exercising due discretion felt the individual poses as a risk of harm to themselves or others. Happens all the time.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
stabbed 3 at apartment complex, ran over some people with car, shot few others
http://www.keyt.com/news/College-town-mass-murder-leaves-7-dead/26153616
There will be no mention of knives nor cars when the call for more laws passed on guns goes up from this event.
Like father, like son. No accepting any responsibility, blaming outsiders like the NRA and politicians, for the actions of his son. No shitty parenting, no overindulgence, no lack of preparing your child for the real world...it's all the NRAs fault.
The guy in the video is one of the victims' father, not the perp's. I haven' seen much more from the father of the perp other than an acknowledgement that it was his son.
The difference is in the OP of that thread the subject in question was a possible threat to herself. In this case the "kid" was making threats of mass murder. The parents could have contacted the courts and petitioned for a mental health warrant so their son could be taken into protective custody and evaluated by mental health professionals. Instead they contacted LE which can not really do anything until Jr. had committed a crime, past tense.
The difference is in the OP of that thread the subject in question was a possible threat to herself. In this case the "kid" was making threats of mass murder. The parents could have contacted the courts and petitioned for a mental health warrant so their son could be taken into protective custody and evaluated by mental health professionals. Instead they contacted LE which can not really do anything until Jr. had committed a crime, past tense.
Actually if the the evidence of threat to a person or others exists. LE can get the paper work. The above inked article never stated if an IVC wad obtained. My point is if they had snatched him people may very well complaining about it. On top of that we don't know what her threat completely was suicide or murder suicide. Either or the liability for LE is the same either way. There is a system in place for these measure and people seem to jump all over LE when things don't run smooth.
He has over 40 10-round mags in his car....so much for 10-round mag law. First three stabbed. Several hit by car...So ban all knives and cars too...
He was so upset that he was still a virgin and it was women's fault that they wouldn't give him any...look at his pic he looks like a weirdo...if he had that kind of money, he could have bought the pu$$y if he wanted it bad enough.
Nope, this is just another privileged, self-centered, narcissistic little shit who decided he'd make a splash on his way out. He even telegraphed his move (ignored). Yet, the ONLY thing that stopped him, eventually, was ANOTHER GUN. You can't stop crazy with any law....should be 'interesting' when Feinstein et all start squalling...
I guess the police could have gotten IVC orders, involuntary commitment orders, or the parents could have. But if he would have said no I am good I was just mad when I made those. Police should have left right, or they could have used force and detained him and transported him to the hospital for an evaluation. But then we might have another thread like this https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?152624-What-constitutional-rights.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=wic&group=05001-06000&file=5150-5155
California Welfare and Institutions Code
WELFARE AND INSTITUTIONS CODE*
SECTION 5150-5155*
"5150. (a) When a person, as a result of a mental health disorder, is a danger to others, or to himself or herself, or gravely disabled, a peace officer, professional person in charge of a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, member of the attending staff, as defined by regulation, of a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, designated members of a mobile crisis team, or professional person designated by the county may, upon probable cause, take, or cause to be taken, the person into custody for a period of up to 72 hours for assessment, evaluation, and crisis intervention, or placement for evaluation and treatment in a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment and approved by the State Department of Health Care Services. At a minimum, assessment, as defined in Section 5150.4, and evaluation, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 5008, shall be conducted and provided on an ongoing basis. Crisis intervention, as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 5008, may be provided concurrently with assessment, evaluation, or any other service. (b) The professional person in charge of a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, member of the attending staff, or professional person designated by the county shall assess the person to determine whether he or she can be properly served without being detained. If in the judgment of the professional person in charge of the facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, member of the attending staff, or professional person designated by the county, the person can be properly served without being detained, he or she shall be provided evaluation, crisis intervention, or other inpatient or outpatient services on a voluntary basis. Nothing in this subdivision shall be interpreted to prevent a peace officer from delivering individuals to a designated facility for assessment under this section. Furthermore, the assessment requirement of this subdivision shall not be interpreted to require peace officers to perform any additional duties other than those specified in Sections 5150.1 and 5150.2. (c) Whenever a person is evaluated by a professional person in charge of a facility designated by the county for evaluation or treatment, member of the attending staff, or professional person designated by the county and is found to be in need of mental health services, but is not admitted to the facility, all available alternative services provided pursuant to subdivision (b) shall be offered as determined by the county mental health director. (d) If, in the judgment of the professional person in charge of the facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, member of the attending staff, or the professional person designated by the county, the person cannot be properly served without being detained, the admitting facility shall require an application in writing stating the circumstances under which the person's condition was called to the attention of the peace officer, professional person in charge of the facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, member of the attending staff, or professional person designated by the county, and stating that the peace officer, professional person in charge of the facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, member of the attending staff, or professional person designated by the county has probable cause to believe that the person is, as a result of a mental health disorder, a danger to others, or to himself or herself, or gravely disabled. If the probable cause is based on the statement of a person other than the peace officer, professional person in charge of the facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment, member of the attending staff, or professional person designated by the county, the person shall be liable in a civil action for intentionally giving a statement which he or she knows to be false. (e) At the time a person is taken into custody for evaluation, or within a reasonable time thereafter, unless a responsible relative or the guardian or conservator of the person is in possession of the person's personal property, the person taking him or her into custody shall take reasonable precautions to preserve and safeguard the personal property in the possession of or on the premises occupied by the person. The person taking him or her into custody shall then furnish to the court a report generally describing the person's property so preserved and safeguarded and its disposition, in substantially the form set forth in Section 5211, except that if a responsible relative or the guardian or conservator of the person is in possession of the person's property, the report shall include only the name of the relative or guardian or conservator and the location of the property, whereupon responsibility of the person taking him or her into custody for that property shall terminate. As used in this section, "responsible relative" includes the spouse, parent, adult child, domestic partner, grandparent, grandchild, or adult brother or sister of the person. (f) (1) Each person, at the time he or she is first taken into custody under this section, shall be provided, by the person who takes him or her into custody, the following information orally in a language or modality accessible to the person. If the person cannot understand an oral advisement, the information shall be provided in writing. The information shall be in substantially the following form: My name is ___________________________________ . I am a _____________________________ (peace officer/mental health ______________ . professional) with __________________ . (name of agency) You are not under criminal arrest, but I am taking you for an examination by mental health professionals at _____________________________ . ____________________ (name of facility) You will be told your rights by the mental health staff. (2) If taken into custody at his or her own residence, the person shall also be provided the following information: You may bring a few personal items with you, which I will have to approve. Please inform me if you need assistance turning off any appliance or water. You may make a phone call and leave a note to tell your friends or family where you have been taken. (g) The designated facility shall keep, for each patient evaluated, a record of the advisement given pursuant to subdivision (f) which shall include all of the following: (1) The name of the person detained for evaluation. (2) The name and position of the peace officer or mental health professional taking the person into custody. (3) The date the advisement was completed. (4) Whether the advisement was completed. (5) The language or modality used to give the advisement. (6) If the advisement was not completed, a statement of good cause, as defined by regulations of the State Department of Health Care Services. (h) (1) Each person admitted to a facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment shall be given the following information by admission staff of the facility. The information shall be given orally and in writing and in a language or modality accessible to the person. The written information shall be available to the person in English and in the language that is the person's primary means of communication. Accommodations for other disabilities that may affect communication shall also be provided. The information shall be in substantially the following form: My name is ____________________________________. My position here is______________________. You are being placed into this psychiatric facility because it is our professional opinion that, as a result of a mental health disorder, you are likely to (check applicable): ( ) Harm yourself. ( ) Harm someone else. ( ) Be unable to take care of your own food, clothing, and housing needs. We believe this is true because ________________________________________________ (list of the facts upon which the allegation of dangerous or gravely disabled due to mental health disorder is based, including pertinent facts arising from the admission interview). You will be held for a period up to 72 hours. During the 72 hours you may also be transferred to another facility. You may request to be evaluated or treated at a facility of your choice. You may request to be evaluated or treated by a mental health professional of your choice. We cannot guarantee the facility or mental health professional you choose will be available, but we will honor your choice if we can. During these 72 hours you will be evaluated by the facility staff, and you may be given treatment, including medications. It is possible for you to be released before the end of the 72 hours. But if the staff decides that you need continued treatment you can be held for a longer period of time. If you are held longer than 72 hours, you have the right to a lawyer and a qualified interpreter and a hearing before a judge. ..."
He has over 40 10-round mags in his car....so much for 10-round mag law.
If they can limit the number of rounds in a mag, they can also limit the legal number of mags one can own. I predict that will be the next shoe to drop.
Mauser KAR98K
05-25-14, 11:37
Sad to see this, but yes the narcissism in this country is becoming more evident. Look at who is in the White House. What was that slogan: "Yes we can". If the President went on a rampage.
At any rate, parents should have had a call girl on retainment for the kid. Might have solved some problems.
What?
I'm 23 and own a 2012 Jeep Wrangler, night vision, multiple rifles, and have a furnished apartment: all without being in debt.
What does that say about me?
Someone's age or possessions has absolutely no relevance on the character of the individual. I guarantee I work with 20 year old's who are better men than the vast majority of 30-something's in our country.
It says you are a hard working, responsible, self-supporting man. I would guess you have several good friends and the respect of many. And you probably don't blame others for any hardships you encounter.
Perhaps I worded my thoughts incompletely. I meant a young guy who was not earning his way but had luxury items lauded on him by mommy and daddy. Any 22 yr old that earned and paid for his own Beemer is probably too worn out late at night to go on a killing rampage. :)
What did Elliott Rodger do as in gainful employment? How did he make his living or was he a trust fund kid?
The answer here will justify a statement of his age and lifestyle...
Grand58742
05-25-14, 12:40
Prayers out to the victims of this heinous act.
And a public service announcement..
I'd be willing to bet pennies to dollars Feinstein or other related politicians will be in on Tuesday introducing yet another ban. Even though unrelated to the current shooting, chances of high cap magazines, modern sporting rifles and/or anything related will be on the chopping block. Bet on it as they can't wait to stand on the still warm bodies of the victims and proclaim their political agenda.
Buy em cheap, stack em deep. It's only going to get worse as the summer progresses and the elections get closer.
decodeddiesel
05-25-14, 13:40
What?
I'm 23 and own a 2012 Jeep Wrangler, night vision, multiple rifles, and have a furnished apartment: all without being in debt.
What does that say about me?
It either says you have loaded parents, or that you bust your ass for what you have. Judging from how proud you are of it, I'm guessing the latter. You are nothing like this ****ing scum who did this other than you are roughly the same chronological age. You're a man who worked for, and earned what you have. This was a spoiled child who expected to be given everything in life (entitlement) up to and including pussy on a platter. The fact that he was driving an $80k+ car, getting a free education at one of the most expensive public schools in the world, did not have to work a day in his life, and wanted not for any material possession just wasn't enough.
What did Elliott Rodger do as in gainful employment? How did he make his living or was he a trust fund kid?
The answer here will justify a statement of his age and lifestyle...
He didn't do shit, never wanted for nothing. He's had his whole life handed to him on the proverbial silver platter.
I'm just disgusted and outraged by this whole thing. My wife watched his "final youtube video" and it seemed like a bad joke, until you realized what he did.
What?
I'm 23 and own a 2012 Jeep Wrangler, night vision, multiple rifles, and have a furnished apartment: all without being in debt.
What does that say about me?
Someone's age or possessions has absolutely no relevance on the character of the individual. I guarantee I work with 20 year old's who are better men than the vast majority of 30-something's in our country.
Did you work for all those things or did Daddy give them to you? I think that is the point that was being made. Elliot didn't work for anything, it was all handed to him.
Belmont31R
05-25-14, 15:32
I think this is just another example of why we should not rely on the government to protect us. Even when dangerous people are wagged under their noses in one way another they are too often turned loose only to go on and harm innocent people. Boston bombers, other shooters, people released from prison, ect.
We have to be able to defend ourselves because in the end your own self is really the only one who is going to stop you from becoming another statistic or part of a body count.
Stand together and form a line, the crazies are not getting past us to hurt anyone else.....
Well, the thought is nice...Never gonna happen.
My MIL still thinks all bad persons, wears black and a mask over their eyes like the Hamburglar...
madisonsfinest
05-25-14, 19:18
This kid was not an idiot. I'm sure he said all of the right things while he was being evaluated. Being evaluated is no guarantee of a lengthy stay in a mental health facility. They may have found grounds for an emergency detention. However that would've been a short lived relief, 72 hours before a hearing. If he is saying all of the right things, and not acting like a total nut job, then he will most likely be released back into the community. There is no easy way of doing this, dealing with humans. Whether by a government official, or a private employee, unless you can read peoples minds, how far do you think people will get. Remember for every time this happens, the most negative outcome, there hundreds of thousands that don't result in any harm to the community at large.
The guy in the video is one of the victims' father, not the perp's. I haven' seen much more from the father of the perp other than an acknowledgement that it was his son.
I'm not talking about the video. I'm talking about what was being reported on the news last night. The father of the shooter is blaming it on politicians and the NRA.
Grand58742
05-25-14, 19:53
I'm not talking about the video. I'm talking about what was being reported on the news last night. The father of the shooter is blaming it on politicians and the NRA.
Actually, it was one of the families of the victims:
Richard Martinez, father of Christopher Martinez, said to reporters. "Chris died because of craven, irresponsible politicians and the NRA. They talk about gun rights, what about Chris' right to live? When will this insanity stop?"
http://www.keyt.com/news/Rampage-in-college-town-began-with-stabbings/26153616
Actually, it was one of the families of the victims:
http://www.keyt.com/news/Rampage-in-college-town-began-with-stabbings/26153616
Fine he is shooting himself in the foot. Blame the NRA and politicians. He was pretty fast pulling the NRA card. He will never get a dime out of them since there is no fault.
On the other hand he might be able to sue his rich parents who actually had some involvement. Where did he get money for the items he used as weapons: car, knives, guns, mags, ammo? If they thought he was a danger why did they not do more to take away his means? Or call for a preventative psych commitment rather than the police who could do nothing unless he was a danger at that moment. His parents should know him better than anyone.
But sure he can go ahead and piss into the wind, he'll FEEL better.
Grand58742
05-25-14, 22:13
Fine he is shooting himself in the foot. Blame the NRA and politicians. He was pretty fast pulling the NRA card. He will never get a dime out of them since there is no fault.
On the other hand he might be able to sue his rich parents who actually had some involvement. Where did he get money for the items he used as weapons: car, knives, guns, mags, ammo? If they thought he was a danger why did they not do more to take away his means? Or call for a preventative psych commitment rather than the police who could do nothing unless he was a danger at that moment. His parents should know him better than anyone.
But sure he can go ahead and piss into the wind, he'll FEEL better.
I don't disagree with you, but I think the point that the liberally biased media chose to key in on that particular comment was extremely telling. The NRA gets demonized just about as much as the Koch Brothers even though they had nothing to do with a State that already suffers from highly strict gun laws. Some reporter probably had an orgasm when the family member made that comment and couldn't wait to get it out on the wire.
I really do feel sympathy for the families. And I can even understand their desire to focus their anger and rage on a specific group. In this case however, it will be against the NRA because that's the way the press will slant the matter. Instead of asking the hard questions to the cops of why they didn't feel the person was a threat, they would rather attack one specific tool he used.
I'm pro cop as many know. But if there isn't a hard core investigation into why their officers let him go, there is no justice. And there needs to be accountability.
FromMyColdDeadHand
05-26-14, 01:05
http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/25/us/santa-barbara-shooting-victims/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
I have nothing but pity for this man. What a dupe and a tool. Six dead, three of them by a knife, and does he mention the killer once? No, he goes after a civil rights organization.
Two asshole fathers. One created a monster and subsidized him with the money made from movies about how amoral and violent our society has become. The other takes the death of his son and blames the people furthest from the problem.
California has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Why isn't he railing against the progressives who promised safety in the name of gun control? They are more culpable in these deaths than the NRA.
What about the culture that objectifies sex and glorifies violence? Where is condemnation of the media?
Even this early on, we know that law enforcement was aware of issues- and again steps weren't taken to avert this. Instead we suspend kids who make guns with their fingers or make a drawing mirroring the violent media they see everywhere.
I just listened to his statement again. Simply incredible- no mention of the murderer.
Here's hoping that another family comes out and lays the blame in the right place and puts this guy in his place.
I wonder, right before he was shot, did his son think, "Oh no, the NRA is here to shoot me......".
This is what happens when progressivism runs amok. You get people who are so twisted in logic that they can't even tell who is shooting at them.
How about being mad at the politicians that didn't allow his son a fighting chance to protect himself.
Actually, it was one of the families of the victims:
http://www.keyt.com/news/Rampage-in-college-town-began-with-stabbings/26153616
Well either it was reported wrong or I heard it wrong. One of them is an idiot, possibly both.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/25/us/santa-barbara-shooting-victims/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
I have nothing but pity for this man. What a dupe and a tool. Six dead, three of them by a knife, and does he mention the killer once? No, he goes after a civil rights organization.
Two asshole fathers. One created a monster and subsidized him with the money made from movies about how amoral and violent our society has become. The other takes the death of his son and blames the people furthest from the problem.
California has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. Why isn't he railing against the progressives who promised safety in the name of gun control? They are more culpable in these deaths than the NRA.
What about the culture that objectifies sex and glorifies violence? Where is condemnation of the media?
Even this early on, we know that law enforcement was aware of issues- and again steps weren't taken to avert this. Instead we suspend kids who make guns with their fingers or make a drawing mirroring the violent media they see everywhere.
I just listened to his statement again. Simply incredible- no mention of the murderer.
Here's hoping that another family comes out and lays the blame in the right place and puts this guy in his place.
I wonder, right before he was shot, did his son think, "Oh no, the NRA is here to shoot me......".
This is what happens when progressivism runs amok. You get people who are so twisted in logic that they can't even tell who is shooting at them.
How about being mad at the politicians that didn't allow his son a fighting chance to protect himself.
Here's a better question...if presented with the opportunity to go back in time and be able to use a gun to try and save his son, would he still insist guns are bad?
Moose-Knuckle
05-26-14, 02:47
On page two of this thread I posted a link to a video of one of the victim's fathers blaming the NRA as if it was scripted.
I ran across this article this evening and it hits it out of the park . . .
Blaming NRA over killings shows no amount of laws enough for anti-gunners
http://www.examiner.com/article/blaming-nra-over-killings-shows-no-amount-of-laws-enough-for-anti-gunners
The sentiments have been echoed by raving gun-grabbers on Twitter, where the tone is uglier. What’s emerging is something psychiatrist Sarah Thompson described as “Raging against Self-Defense,” that is, indignant slurs by people who bring neither facts nor logic nor anything but ignorance and hostility to the discussion. That said, those individuals have done gun owners an unintended service, because they clearly offer proof that no amount of “gun control,” for which California has been hailed as a leader by citizen disarmament groups, will ever be enough for them.
I've been saying this for a loooong time now, it's not just firearms that are being targeted by the lunatic left, but the very notion of self-defense. If these scrote bags don't wan't/believe that a person has the right to defend themselves against a violent assailant just imagine how much more they don't believe you have the right to defend yourself or the nation from tyranny.
Grand58742
05-26-14, 03:14
Well either it was reported wrong or I heard it wrong. One of them is an idiot, possibly both.
You trust facts to get into the way of biased reporting?
Another shooting in California? Must have been Santa Barbara, Spain because this can't happen in CA. The typical media pundits, our moronic president and other politicians will blame guns as usual. They will always default to attacking guns because they know its the easy target. Get ready for more gun control legislation in CA and the federal level.
Did you work for all those things or did Daddy give them to you? I think that is the point that was being made. Elliot didn't work for anything, it was all handed to him.
Fair enough, and I understand the loathing many of us feel towards those kinds of kids. My generation has produced a shitload of narcissists, but there are also many more out there doing great things.
I should've worded my initial post to be less confrontational, I just hate when we all get lumped together.
But if there isn't a hard core investigation into why their officers let him go, there is no justice. And there needs to be accountability.
A simple Googel search of his name and city might have turned up enough to hold him on. Such searchs should be mandatory when investigating. Just a WAG, but I'll bet they aren't. Lots of $ spent on military gear when training to a 5th grade tech level might have saved the day.
I think this is just another example of why we should not rely on the government to protect us. Even when dangerous people are wagged under their noses in one way another they are too often turned loose only to go on and harm innocent people. Boston bombers, other shooters, people released from prison, ect.
We have to be able to defend ourselves because in the end your own self is really the only one who is going to stop you from becoming another statistic or part of a body count.
This post is on point.
ForTehNguyen
05-26-14, 08:36
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oybAUKZhaMA
This post is on point.
There is case law which supports this. It has been my point for along time. The ruling was the job of LE was the safety of the general public not the safety of individual. This means you are responsible for protecting you.
Full article: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SANTA_BARBARA_RAMPAGE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-05-26-03-37-01
Selected quotes (emphasis added by me):
"It was the second time in recent months that Rodger's mother tried to intervene. In April, she had called one of her son's counselors after seeing bizarre videos he had posted on YouTube, though not the disturbing one he posted shortly before the killings, Astaire said. The counselor called a mental health service, which then called police.
Santa Barbara County Sheriff's deputies who showed up at Rodger's doorstep to check on his mental health, however, weren't aware of any videos, the department's spokeswoman Kelly Hoover said. They concluded after their visit that the well-mannered if shy young man posed no risk.
So further evidence that general interagency communications within the mental health system are crap? Color me shocked.
So assuming that is correct and LE had no knowledge of the videos prior to the wellbeing check then someone dropped the ball. That being said it should have been well within powers of kids treating entity to initiate IVC process even if under the constraints of a short term period.
At anyrate blaming LE for anything unless they were totally negligent is a road to nowhere. And unless there were some blatantly obvious signs that the was a danger at the time of the home visit such a determination is outside their scope of competency anyway. I think a lot of the time people misconstrue the fact that most IVC matters are civil and not criminal in nature.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
So assuming that is correct and LE had no knowledge of the videos prior to the wellbeing check then someone dropped the ball.
You got it! The parents and at least one of the doctors knew about the videos in April. And yet nobody told LE. For shame. I still say checking Google, YouTube, et al, should be SOP by LE as part of the home visit investigation.
FromMyColdDeadHand
05-26-14, 10:51
That dad forgot to blame George Bush...
montanadave
05-26-14, 11:03
Despite strict gun-control laws, concerned parents, public proclamations of violent intent, and involvement of mental health providers and law enforcement . . . bad shit still happened. There is simply no way to predict and prevent every ****ed-up person from committing violent acts without tossing out all constitutional guarantees of personal liberty and submission to a draconian police state where every individual's moves and motives are subject to scrutiny by committee and confinement at the first indication of deviation from "social norms."
And that's NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN! Numero uno: We haven't burned the Constitution yet. Numero dos: And even if we did, no one is going to pay for it.
But this is certainly a case which demands scrutiny, as it could readily have been prevented. How ironic that in this age of "connectedness" with everyone plugged into social media and inundated by texts, emails, tweets, blogs, Facebook, etc., the warning signs in plain view where not shared by the parties who might have averted this tragedy.
One bad apple don't spoil the whole basket. But it's a big basket these days and we've got some seriously bad apples rolling around. We can do better than this.
ForTehNguyen
05-26-14, 13:08
they said the family called the cops and they interviewed him and said he was "polite" and didnt do anything
You got it! The parents and at least one of the doctors knew about the videos in April. And yet nobody told LE. For shame. I still say checking Google, YouTube, et al, should be SOP by LE as part of the home visit investigation.
A cursory public Google search is better than nothing but in reality departments don't have the time or manpower available and without a warrant nobody is getting access to ones computers et al.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
they said the family called the cops and they interviewed him and said he was "polite" and didnt do anything
Which translates to he was actively psychotic or voicing any homicidal ideation. Without knowing anything else there really isn't anything else the could do on their end.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
Eurodriver
05-26-14, 15:23
This dad's mentality tells me everything I need to know about why his son turned out how he did.
decodeddiesel
05-26-14, 15:52
This dad's mentality tells me everything I need to know about why his son turned out how he did.
Nailed it.
FYI, this POS kid was a poster on Bodybuilding.com forums, a forum I frequent to answer Qs and such as i'm "in the business" so to speak. The BB.com "Misc" section is huge. It's also filled with a bunch of kids who do nothing but complain about women, how evil they are, how much they hate them (essentially angry and resentful most women/girls wont give them the time of day) and so forth.
The sad thing is, this is the norm on that forum, and it's one of the largest forums on the 'net. and if you want to get an inside look at what a many young males think about women, look there. Now, this kids posts were removed from BB.com forums for obvious reasons, but you can see some of them here if interested:
https://storify.com/NewSecular/elliot-rodger-bodybuilding-com-forum
As I said, his comments are the norm there in my experience and I have seen it grow over time over the years. Now, obviously, 99.9% of the kids there making such comments are just venting and being idiots, but it's an eye opener to see how so many young men seem to feel about women these days. It's an insight into how clueless, coddled, and delusional many people (in this case young men) are today and in the context of knowing at least one went off the rails, puts it in a new perspective for me.
In one comment he said:
"Women don't deserve rights. They are evil, sadistic beasts who whore themselves out to degenerate men and ignore the men who actually deserve them."
These are not uncommon comments for that forum. In fact, they wouldn't even get a second glance from most posters, and if they do, it's usually to agree with such comments.
Voodoo_Man
05-26-14, 17:40
FYI, this POS kid was a poster on Bodybuilding.com forums, a forum I frequent to answer Qs and such as i'm "in the business" so to speak. The BB.com "Misc" section is huge. It's also filled with a bunch of kids who do nothing but complain about women, how evil they are, how much they hate them (essentially angry and resentful most women/girls wont give them the time of day) and so forth.
The sad thing is, this is the norm on that forum, and it's one of the largest forums on the 'net. and if you want to get an inside look at what a many young males think about women, look there. Now, this kids posts were removed from BB.com forums for obvious reasons, but you can see some of them here if interested:
https://storify.com/NewSecular/elliot-rodger-bodybuilding-com-forum
As I said, his comments are the norm there in my experience and I have seen it grow over time over the years. Now, obviously, 99.9% of the kids there making such comments are just venting and being idiots, but it's an eye opener to see how so many young men seem to feel about women these days. It's an insight into how clueless, coddled, and delusional many people (in this case young men) are today and in the context of knowing at least one went off the rails, puts it in a new perspective for me.
In one comment he said:
"Women don't deserve rights. They are evil, sadistic beasts who whore themselves out to degenerate men and ignore the men who actually deserve them."
These are not uncommon comments for that forum. In fact, they wouldn't even get a second glance from most posters, and if they do, it's usually to agree with such comments.
Thanks for posting this, I occasionally browse that forum.
Parents need to take better care with their interactions with their children, giving a child everything they want in life then assuming they will grow up to be a productive member of society is a very real falsehood.
Thanks for posting this, I occasionally browse that forum.
Parents need to take better care with their interactions with their children, giving a child everything they want in life then assuming they will grow up to be a productive member of society is a very real falsehood.
I hate to say it, but not a bad place for LE and professional profilers to read to see what's going on inside the heads of some young people today. What % of the younger population think that way? I have no idea, but that's a very large and popular forum even by the 'nets standards and such comments/attitudes the norm there. Anyone who thinks that was just some random angry kid who's in the minority on that forum (of unknown representation to the age matched population at large granted) does not have a clue.
And before some jump on blaming some SSRI he may have been on we have "The accused UCSB mass murderer had been prescribed, but refused to take, psychiatric medication to help with his “extreme paranoia,” a source close to Elliot Rodger‘s family tells RadarOnline.com exclusively."
Source not vetted, but that's what's being reported.
Now, perhaps had he taken his meds, it may not have happened. We don't know, but we do know it's not a simple cause and claiming such, be it SSRI's, video games, or other, as the singular cause.
Eurodriver
05-26-14, 18:02
Surprise! Any guy under 30 knows this is how the majority of men view women. Hell, just go to TOS if you want to get the 2A crowd version
It seems the only people who don't know this are the young women of which they speak.
BTW, there is some truth to the matter. I've never dated a girl by being a gentleman. You have to treat them like you don't care and then they fall HARD.
ETA: I'm not advocating any of the mentalities associated with this thread, just pointing out observations.
A cursory public Google search is better than nothing.................
All the had to do was put his real name into YouTube. How hard is that?
All the had to do was put his real name into YouTube. How hard is that?
You don't know exactly what "they" did and "how hard is that?" always 20/20. "They" don't sit around googling people as a rule. Again, go look at YT and you'll countless vids like his, or FAR worse. Our system of justice, under that annoying Const., does not allow "them" to arrest people for saying incredibly horrible shit. You're on the same 'net I am, why you not aware of that? Go to youtube, start searching. You'll see. That vid I posted in the prior page came up within seconds of a search under "I hate women" and that guy jumps out at me as a disaster in the making. Not an if, but when kinda feeling. Way more so than this kids vids, which frankly were pretty tame to what you'll find. I'm no legal expert on this, but unless one if making very specific threats on exactly the who, what, where, and how they plan to commit violence, it's VERY difficult to do anything about it, and even then....
How about this kid? What do we do with him? Is he just talking BS or is he a risk?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92RML7810Fs
"They" don't sit around googling people as a rule.
My earlier premise was that when a parent calls and says their kid is a problem, in treatment and threatening violence, then LE doing a search on the net should be SOP. I understand that all/most don't do it now, but I am saying they should as part of the pre-visit investigation. Perhaps if they had done so, the visit might have produced more than a friendly chat. Jeez, what the heck is so hard about that?
My earlier premise was that when a parent calls and says their kid is a problem, in treatment and threatening violence, then LE doing a search on the net should be SOP. I understand that all/most don't do it now, but I am saying they should as part of the pre-visit investigation. Perhaps if they had done so, the visit might have produced more than a friendly chat. Jeez, what the heck is so hard about that?
To repeat, we don't know exactly they knew, and, under CA law, vids or not, not a damn thing they could do legally that actually would have prevented this one. So said a CA legal expert speaking on NPR I listened to. If that's not the case, and someone here knows CA law ad or has another source, hopefully they can supply it. One more time, unless he gave very specific what, who, when, how info in those vids (and he didn't) there's very little LE can do about it.
It appears most simply can't fathom what can actually be done legally under such circumstances which is a classic catch 22 of our system. If they dropped the ball, then heads should roll, but knowing what they actually have legal authority to do under the circumstances is key. This one, as much as people can't deal with it because they want neat clean easy answers, maybe "shit happens"
That tricky Const allows you and I to say all manner of terrible things and with that, can cone a cost. Once is a while, the 0.001% of those saying it, actually do it.
I don't have the answer as to how to fix it, but I do know our mental health care system is broken and has been a long time and that's a place to start vs saying encroaching on our Const Rights.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cops-ex-student-arrested-in-california-college-shooting-threat/
http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/129160513.html?mobile=y
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Threat-Prompts-Evacuation-East-LA-College-207715541.html
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/03/20/lincoln-high-student-arrested-for-making-false-bomb-threat/
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/OC-Student-Arrested-After-Threatening-to-Shoot-Students-at-High-School-250945321.html#
http://www.cbs8.com/story/11387169/ramona-high-school-student-arrested-for-threats
Until the investigation is complete, the particular circumstances of the events leading up to the shooting/ killing won't be known. I suspect there will be culpability on all sides of this tragedy. In California any LE agency can do a simple check in the CAL DOJ system for firearms, particularly handguns, either by the address or the registrant's name. In the course of their investigation, I would be curious if this was done. Also, the parents may have had knowledge of their son owning firearms as well. It may have assisted the authorities in their investigation when the mother reported her concerns.
Lastly, making threats only has led to arrests in California as referenced by the listed articles above. But, I agree with others sometimes the actions of a lone madman can be difficult to prevent. However, it is very ironic that people often speak of warning signals or precursors leading to the violent incident.
Riddle me this:
How in the f*ck is the media allowed to report on this BS?
Glorification of these killers is essentially why these things keep happening.
montanadave
05-26-14, 22:15
Riddle me this:
How in the f*ck is the media allowed to report on this BS?
That would be the first amendment.
Mauser KAR98K
05-26-14, 22:16
Surprise! Any guy under 30 knows this is how the majority of men view women. Hell, just go to TOS if you want to get the 2A crowd version
It seems the only people who don't know this are the young women of which they speak.
BTW, there is some truth to the matter. I've never dated a girl by being a gentleman. You have to treat them like you don't care and then they fall HARD.
ETA: I'm not advocating any of the mentalities associated with this thread, just pointing out observations.
Well, looks like I'm screwed, or not getting screwed.
I saw this in college. The bros got the girls, or even the actually bright ones, but seemed to treat them like objects more. It's a shame really.
Society on both ends caused this. What's that saying, takes a village to raise a child. Too bad the American Village is more interested in minding their own business or staying out of others. interesting that its the liberals that expound that line but act further from its meaning...and we get this guy.
That would be the first amendment.
My understanding is that there are limitations placed on the reporting of suicides, especially those of teenagers.
Why would the same rules not be applied to these situations?
Mauser KAR98K
05-26-14, 22:17
Riddle me this:
How in the f*ck is the media allowed to report on this BS?
Glorification of these killers is essentially why these things keep happening.
Would it make your blood boil that they actually know this and are maybe wanting more of these shootings so they can get more leverage to ban all weapons?
Just a thought.
Would it make your blood boil that they actually know this and are maybe wanting more of these shootings so they can get more leverage to ban all weapons?
Just a thought.
Which is exactly my point.
I guess I'm preaching to the choir. I'm just frustrated because, being in med school, I'm surrounded by liberals who are spitting anti-gun BS at me left and right.
brushy bill
05-26-14, 22:46
Just heard one of the sheeple on the news comment, "Why would anyone need 3 semi-automatic handguns?"
No matter what ground we give, it is for naught because the other side wants the entire enchilada. A 2 round semi-auto would probably be bad in this guy's world.
We need to recognize this and stop "compromising". You cannot compromise with these people.
SeriousStudent
05-26-14, 22:50
Which is exactly my point.
I guess I'm preaching to the choir. I'm just frustrated because, being in med school, I'm surrounded by liberals who are spitting anti-gun BS at me left and right.
Keep the faith, you are needed.
Oh, and don't spit back. You are a very educated fellow, you know how unsanitary that is. ;)
Moose-Knuckle
05-27-14, 02:53
FYI, this POS kid was a poster on Bodybuilding.com forums, a forum I frequent to answer Qs and such as i'm "in the business" so to speak. The BB.com "Misc" section is huge. It's also filled with a bunch of kids who do nothing but complain about women, how evil they are, how much they hate them (essentially angry and resentful most women/girls wont give them the time of day) and so forth.
The sad thing is, this is the norm on that forum, and it's one of the largest forums on the 'net. and if you want to get an inside look at what a many young males think about women, look there. Now, this kids posts were removed from BB.com forums for obvious reasons, but you can see some of them here if interested:
https://storify.com/NewSecular/elliot-rodger-bodybuilding-com-forum
As I said, his comments are the norm there in my experience and I have seen it grow over time over the years. Now, obviously, 99.9% of the kids there making such comments are just venting and being idiots, but it's an eye opener to see how so many young men seem to feel about women these days. It's an insight into how clueless, coddled, and delusional many people (in this case young men) are today and in the context of knowing at least one went off the rails, puts it in a new perspective for me.
In one comment he said:
"Women don't deserve rights. They are evil, sadistic beasts who whore themselves out to degenerate men and ignore the men who actually deserve them."
These are not uncommon comments for that forum. In fact, they wouldn't even get a second glance from most posters, and if they do, it's usually to agree with such comments.
Will thanks for posting this, disturbing to say the least. On one hand we have a bunch of young men obsessed with their bodies exhibiting "roid rage" towards women, sounds like a lot of them are closet cases who are frustrated and question their own sexuality all the while struggling with their own self image. When they discover who really gets their rocks off maybe they're vagina hate will dissipate. On the other hand, we have the makings of the next generation of serial rapists/killers in this country. With all the data mining / surveillance the Feds do these days, I hope the profilers are collecting data on some of these guys.
My wife and I converse often on currents events and other happenings. Just yesterday we were discussing the topic of self-defense as she just finished reading Col. Cooper's timeless work Principles of Self Defense. I explained to her that she has to always remember that women are overwhelmingly targeted for violent crimes, not just the obvious sexual assaults but also due to their physical size as assailants will always victimize someone they feel they can overpower. In the PC liberal utopia that our nation is being transformed into hate crimes are the norm. If a homosexual man is attacked it's a hate crime, if a minority is attacked it's a hate crime, etc. IMHO every time a women is attacked it should be a hate crime by the standards set forth by the leftists as she was targeted for her gender. Double hate crime depending her race, the last FBI crime by demographic data that was published before Holder was appointed AG is very telling in this area but that is the subject of another thread.
Moose-Knuckle
05-27-14, 02:59
BTW, there is some truth to the matter. I've never dated a girl by being a gentleman. You have to treat them like you don't care and then they fall HARD.
Maybe your dating the wrong kind of girls?
Moose-Knuckle
05-27-14, 03:11
Boy howdy, this vic's dad is just getting better and better . . .
Father blames government 'idiots' as California town mourns killings
Martinez said his son died because Congress had failed to act after a mentally ill gunman killed 26 people in December 2012 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.
"These people are getting rich sitting in Congress. And what do they do? They don't take care of our kids," he said.
http://news.yahoo.com/california-gunman-manifesto-said-police-nearly-thwarted-plot-004327059.html
But I thought its was the NRA's fault Mr. Martinez? Now your son was killed by the United States Congress, after all your late son's personal safety is their responsibility right?
This guy wants to blame everyone but the killer for his son's murder, makes you wonder what he would be saying had his son been one of the stabbing victims.
alienb1212
05-27-14, 06:11
Boy howdy, this vic's dad is just getting better and better . . .
Father blames government 'idiots' as California town mourns killings
http://news.yahoo.com/california-gunman-manifesto-said-police-nearly-thwarted-plot-004327059.html
But I thought its was the NRA's fault Mr. Martinez? Now your son was killed by the United States Congress, after all your late son's personal safety is their responsibility right?
This guy wants to blame everyone but the killer for his son's murder, makes you wonder what he would be saying had his son been one of the stabbing victims.
Obvious to me that this is the faut of the Koch brothers.
Eurodriver
05-27-14, 06:20
Would it make your blood boil that they actually know this and are maybe wanting more of these shootings so they can get more leverage to ban all weapons?
Just a thought.
That's exactly what it is, no one needs to look any further than the lack of coverage about half of his murder victims being killed with a knife.
In California any LE agency can do a simple check in the CAL DOJ system for firearms, particularly handguns, either by the address or the registrant's name.
-Snip-
Lastly, making threats only has led to arrests in California as referenced by the listed articles above.
Thank you for posting this information.
montanadave
05-27-14, 06:36
That's exactly what it is, no one needs to look any further than the lack of coverage about half of his murder victims being killed with a knife.
I read multiple articles online over the past two days and this was glaringly obvious. The headlines contained the words "mass shooting," "guns," etc., and the articles contained details of the handguns, number of rounds, etc., but not a word regarding the use of a knife to kill half the victims. Yellow journalism at its finest.
Phillygunguy
05-27-14, 08:00
Boy howdy, this vic's dad is just getting better and better . . .
Father blames government 'idiots' as California town mourns killings
http://news.yahoo.com/california-gunman-manifesto-said-police-nearly-thwarted-plot-004327059.html
But I thought its was the NRA's fault Mr. Martinez? Now your son was killed by the United States Congress, after all your late son's personal safety is their responsibility right?
This guy wants to blame everyone but the killer for his son's murder, makes you wonder what he would be saying had his son been one of the stabbing victims.
You know the media probably wrote that for him to say on the air to politicize how evil the NRA is and guns are bad blah blah blah
I read multiple articles online over the past two days and this was glaringly obvious. The headlines contained the words "mass shooting," "guns," etc., and the articles contained details of the handguns, number of rounds, etc., but not a word regarding the use of a knife to kill half the victims. Yellow journalism at its finest.
And what of the car? Early reports said at least 4 people injured were do to be struck by his car. Is that no longer accurate? Don't lose site of that (if true) as it's every bit as important as the knife issue. This event is the poster child for why gun control is utterly futile. My understanding is this was a shooting/stabbing/car killing spree and that the people hit by the car (if confirmed) didn't die no different than some who were shot didn't die. Intent to kill with a deadly weapon was there.
montanadave
05-27-14, 09:17
And what of the car? Early reports said at least 4 people injured were do to be struck by his car. Is that no longer accurate? Don't lose site of that (if true) as it's every bit as important as the knife issue. This event is the poster child for why gun control is utterly futile. My understanding is this was a shooting/stabbing/car killing spree and that the people hit by the car (if confirmed) didn't die no different than some who were shot didn't die. Intent to kill with a deadly weapon was there.
Yep. I read somewhere that in his Youtube vids or online comments he stated he was planning on "splattering" as many people as possible with his car. This POS was going to do as much harm as possible by whatever means available. And he injured more people with a knife and his vehicle than he did with the pistols in his possession.
But that doesn't fit the gun-control narrative so . . . [cue crickets].
This kid was not an idiot. I'm sure he said all of the right things while he was being evaluated. Being evaluated is no guarantee of a lengthy stay in a mental health facility. They may have found grounds for an emergency detention. However that would've been a short lived relief, 72 hours before a hearing. If he is saying all of the right things, and not acting like a total nut job, then he will most likely be released back into the community. There is no easy way of doing this, dealing with humans. Whether by a government official, or a private employee, unless you can read peoples minds, how far do you think people will get. Remember for every time this happens, the most negative outcome, there hundreds of thousands that don't result in any harm to the community at large.
BINGO. If they know what they are doing, an E.D. is useless.
I've E.D.'d people that are batshit crazy that Im honestly shocked haven't went on a rampage, and they got out of the hospital well before the 72hr period. Why? Because they said all the right stuff to behavioral health services.
I've cleaned up the thread and removed posts that were not directly relevant to the topic.
Please stay on topic and act like respectable adults.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Women wanted to be treated as "equals in every way" has unintended consequences. If you come at a man, like a man, you may get treated as a man (which on average leaves them at a huge disadvantage). We are slowly but surely removing from society the idea that women should be protected (in the name of equality) - and therefore, are free game (targets) for men who might otherwise thru social norms otherwise restrained themselves. One of the reasons I do not want to see women in combat jobs. Removing the ingrained social norm that women should be physically protected leaves them open as ripe targets of opportunity. Not good for the continuation of our society. Pandora's box.
Sam I hope I didn't just bust what you did to clean this up. My apologies if I did but I find it to have some relevance.
FromMyColdDeadHand
05-27-14, 13:09
..... Yellow journalism at its finest.
Ah, HA! You are a racist!!! What do you have against our oriental friends?
Yep. I read somewhere that in his Youtube vids or online comments he stated he was planning on "splattering" as many people as possible with his car. This POS was going to do as much harm as possible by whatever means available. And he injured more people with a knife and his vehicle than he did with the pistols in his possession.
But that doesn't fit the gun-control narrative so . . . [cue crickets].
Wait till some progressive uses it as a reason that we all need automated cars... no more 'high-capacity' BMWs.
That vics dad gets weirder by the interview. He has to have some kind of history of hatred and political activism. If I didn't know better I'd say he was not actually the father and it was some kind of hoax. How about putting your son in the ground first before you start the political campaign.
Jeez, another kid under psychiatric care goes on a rampage with the lethal trifecta of knive, car and guns, egged on by our amoral culture and he goes after Republicans.
Here's hoping another one of the families tells this ass-hat to STFU.
So far people have heard about the narcissistic killer and this loose-cannon dad. How about something about the victims?
This cat must have been one weird chimmy changa to spook off broads for 22 years.
All the had to do was put his real name into YouTube. How hard is that?
I hadn't looked for any of the videos. Was he posting under his real name? Also from what was reported the police were never informed about the videos to begin with, or did they recant that?
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
ForTehNguyen
05-27-14, 17:14
if you watch the Stefan Molyneux video that analyzes his manifesto, his rents were real pieces of crap as well. They arent scott free in leading him down this destructive path.
I hadn't looked for any of the videos. Was he posting under his real name? Also from what was reported the police were never informed about the videos to begin with, or did they recant that?
I though I had seen one of the videos with his actual name on it but now I can't find it. Most of what are now posted are reposts by someone else.
According to selected quotes from this article of earlier today:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/05/27/elliot-rodgers-family-tried-to-intervene-before-deadly-rampage/
It was the second time in recent months that Rodger's mother tried to intervene. In April, she had called one of her son's counselors after seeing bizarre videos he had posted on YouTube, though not the disturbing one he posted shortly before the killings, Astaire said. The counselor called a mental health service, which then called police.
He posted at least 22 YouTube videos. He wrote in his manifesto that he uploaded most of his videos in the week leading up to April 26, when he originally planned to carry out his attacks. He postponed his plan after catching a cold.
It is hard for me to believe that parents and therapists were seeing the videos and knew where to find them and didn't tell LE about them, but stranger things have happened. LE denies knowing about them.
And what of the car? Early reports said at least 4 people injured were do to be struck by his car. Is that no longer accurate? Don't lose site of that (if true) as it's every bit as important as the knife issue. This event is the poster child for why gun control is utterly futile. My understanding is this was a shooting/stabbing/car killing spree and that the people hit by the car (if confirmed) didn't die no different than some who were shot didn't die. Intent to kill with a deadly weapon was there.
Yep, if he had been driving a Smart car none of this would have happened. He would blame Smart for his lack of nookie. He would still be put-putting toward campus. The first pedestrian he hit would have totalled it. :)
If you take the guns out if the scenario you have a guy stabbing three people, running over several others with a car and killing one more. Would this have ever made national news?
Bad joke, in poor taste. Sorry.
Its like watching a political rally..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2641165/Crusading-father-son-shot-dead-virgin-killer-brings-20-000-mourning-students-feet-emotional-Not-One-More-speech-campus-vigil.html
A book deal will probably be next. Also, I'd caution against reading through the comments in link unless you want a migraine.
ETA:
Nope the fault lies with creatine, yup creatine.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2641297/Friend-tells-virgin-killer-turned-angry-getting-addicted-body-building-drug-creatine-quest-women.html
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
One thing I don't understand is why these pro-2A articles, sites and Facebook pages are saying: "Look! Gun control in CA didn't work!".
Admitting this only supports the idea of weapons bans and confiscation...
One thing I don't understand is why these pro-2A articles, sites and Facebook pages are saying: "Look! Gun control in CA didn't work!".
Admitting this only supports the idea of weapons bans and confiscation...
I've been saying the same. It also happens when people point out the crimes or robberies that weren't prevented. I always point out that the Anti agenda is to do away with guns altogether not just regulate them
I've been saying the same. It also happens when people point out the crimes or robberies that weren't prevented. I always point out that the Anti agenda is to do away with guns altogether not just regulate them
Definitely.
It also annoys me when pro-2A sources default to "My Constitutional rights!". This is obviously true, and I agree. However, it's not enough of an argument for the gun-grabbers.
Personally, the argument that holds the most truth for me is that of the right to protect myself, my loved ones and my property. The last-line of which happens to be the use of lethality against an aggressor.
Its like watching a political rally..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2641165/Crusading-father-son-shot-dead-virgin-killer-brings-20-000-mourning-students-feet-emotional-Not-One-More-speech-campus-vigil.html
A book deal will probably be next. Also, I'd caution against reading through the comments in link unless you want a migraine.
ETA:
Nope the fault lies with creatine, yup creatine.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2641297/Friend-tells-virgin-killer-turned-angry-getting-addicted-body-building-drug-creatine-quest-women.html
"While not illegal, some users of creatine have experienced side effects such as violent mood swings and depression."
Wow. Just inventing sh&% as they want.
BTW, there is some truth to the matter. I've never dated a girl by being a gentleman. You have to treat them like you don't care and then they fall HARD.
It depends on the type of girls and where you're trolling for a piece of azz. I've "dated" my fair share of girls in my younger days but it was simply for the purpose of draining the poison. Then when I met my wife I treated her like a lady and she was receptive. But the part I don't understand about this dumb ass kid is that he claims he couldn't get laid. If he actually tried, I don't see how this is possible because drunk college girls will fk just about anyone. But it seems as though his standards were unrealistic. I got the impression that he only wanted the perfect 10 blonde bombshells. Given enough time and creativity on his part, he may have been able to land one but it seems as though playing on the Nofriendo was more important than getting laid. Then he had a hardon for the cruel world around him when the biggest issue was simply that he was a social misfit.
"While not illegal, some users of creatine have experienced side effects such as violent mood swings and depression."
Wow. Just inventing sh&% as they want.
LOL that's rich.....
"While not illegal, some users of creatine have experienced side effects such as violent mood swings and depression."
Wow. Just inventing sh&% as they want.
"While not illegal, most users of alcohol have experienced side effects such as violent mood swings and depression."
The test of any substance should be: Is it worse than alcohol? If the answer is no, then you (not you Will, but the media in general) have no right to mention it since you probably drink weekly, if not daily.
He also revealed that Rodger was bullied in online body-building forums
Oh crap, we better be super poite here, since everyone here has firearms!!
"While not illegal, most users of alcohol have experienced side effects such as violent mood swings and depression."
The test of any substance should be: Is it worse than alcohol? If the answer is no, then you (not you Will, but the media in general) have no right to mention it since you probably drink weekly, if not daily.
Why I dislike reporters so much. It was a total fabrication. Reporter gets hold of some kid on the 'net pretending to be the Roger's friend, and entertains himself by seeing how much nonsense he can invent that the "reporter" will print. Per usual, zero vetting of sources because accuracy is not important. Here's the entire conversation of "reporter" and troll:
http://fitmisc.com/forum/showthread.php/63711-ITT-ghettocandyman-gets-questioned-by-reporter-on-facebook-about-elliot-GTFIH
What I sent to the reporter who's email is in the email exchanges above:
"Emma, I saw your email in an exchange regarding a “friend” of Elliot Rodger and you have been had. All of it nonsense. What ever happened to investigating your sources as a reporter? I have been in the media myself for 2 decades, and also happen to have expertise on creatine. Your entire email conversation can be found below, and now all the totally fabricated information you supplied, is being published in the news rags I see, such as the Mirror. If you had any journalistic integrity at all, you’d alter your editors immediately and post a retraction. "
There's a fine art to trolling, and that guy gets it.
FromMyColdDeadHand
05-28-14, 11:00
Definitely.
It also annoys me when pro-2A sources default to "My Constitutional rights!". This is obviously true, and I agree. However, it's not enough of an argument for the gun-grabbers.
Personally, the argument that holds the most truth for me is that of the right to protect myself, my loved ones and my property. The last-line of which happens to be the use of lethality against an aggressor.
Constitutional rights? We are one vote away from a SCOTUS that would make Heller meaningless.
7.62WildBill
05-28-14, 11:17
When did "appeal to emotion" cease to be a logical fallacy?
Here are a few gems from this piece in The New Yorker http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2014/05/christopher-michael-martinezs-father-gets-it-right.html :
"Why did Chris die? Chris died because of craven, irresponsible politicians and the N.R.A."
"Christopher died because of craven, irresponsible politicians and the N.R.A. That’s true. That the killer in question was in the grip of a mad, woman-hating ideology, or that he was also capable of stabbing someone to death with a knife, are peripheral issues to the central one of a gun culture that has struck the Martinez family and ruined their lives."
"Because the N.R.A. and the politicians they intimidate enable people to get their hands on weapons and ammunition whose only purpose is to kill other people as quickly and as lethally as possible."
This is what we are up against. Reasoning where logic is replaced by emotion. For example, if guns "only purpose is to kill other people as quickly and as lethally as possible", then 99.9% of the 100 million American gun owners are using their guns improperly!
The liberal talk station I listen to, is telling it's listeners to send their representatives cards saying "Not one more."
So expect more gun ban talks.
The liberal talk station I listen to, is telling it's listeners to send their representatives cards saying "Not one more."
How about send one that says "Not one more gun ban." instead.
The liberal talk station I listen to...
????
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
????
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I knew someone would ask about it :D One night when leaving work (12am) I was randomly flipping through the channels and listened to this guys scathing comments about someone- I forgot who- I found it interesting and started to listen. Ever since then I leave on in the car to hear what the liberals talk about, it is very enlightening actually.
Here is another gem I just heard:
A caller was saying 'To bear arms' can mean simply to own firearms, but not use them...
I knew someone would ask about it :D One night when leaving work (12am) I was randomly flipping through the channels and listened to this guys scathing comments about someone- I forgot who- I found it interesting and started to listen. Ever since then I leave on in the car to hear what the liberals talk about, it is very enlightening actually.
Here is another gem I just heard:
A caller was saying 'To bear arms' can mean simply to own firearms, but not use them...
Keep your Friends close, but your Enemies closer....
There's a fine art to trolling, and that guy gets it.
Note all mention of creatine gone from that page so the email I sent may have penetrated, but being the net, it will be be found other places for sure. As usual, print first, check facts after media doing it's usual:
Major News Outlets Fall for Elaborate Elliot Rodger Hoax (http://www.americanluxurymag.com/2014/05/28/major-news-outlets-fall-for-elaborate-elliot-rodger-hoax/#.U4Y9ny8ymo9)
So what about the video game angle? Did nutzo not play Call of HALO 4 for hours on end?
I did see some of this nut bag's archived threads on body building forums. The members there had seen his Gen 1 creepy videos and Cuckoo mentioned that he had pulled them since his parents found them, but was going to upload more soon.
The members weren't particularly harsh to this ass wad considering how bizarre his posting was. I'd have got an infraction if the little pissant posted on this forum.
Cincinnatus
05-28-14, 20:06
I'd have got an infraction if the little pissant posted on this forum.
Instead of you getting an infraction, I think it would have been enormously entertaining to see Jsantoro or another mod come along and smash that guy into bits with the almighty Hammer of Thor, an epic dressing down of R. Lee Ermey in FMJ proportions
SeriousStudent
05-28-14, 21:15
Instead of you getting an infraction, I think it would have been enormously entertaining to see Jsantoro or another mod come along and smash that guy into bits with the almighty Hammer of Thor, an epic dressing down of R. Lee Ermey in FMJ proportions
I personally would have lit the Batsignal on that one, and made popcorn for the entire audience to enjoy the show.
Sgt Santoro truly enjoys his art. :cool:
FromMyColdDeadHand
05-28-14, 23:07
The stabber hated women and he hadn't even been divorced yet. It usually takes a couple of divorces, and then its still usually a woman-by-woman thing, not a general thing.
The no-sex thing does kind of chime in with why most of the world's a-holes with a penchant towards violence aimed at the innocent come from fundamentalist Islamic upbringings.
Is it just me, or has the MSM pretty much gone cold on this? It isn't even on the front page of CNN? Which is a shame since I think there are potential lessons to be learned from it.
My hypothesis is that mentally disturbed people (most of them on SSRIs- though I don't know the cause and effect here) commit suicide, often with a gun. In a small fraction of these cases, they go out and kill other people first. Mass shooters are not some out-of-the-blue occurrence, they are just a small subset of a larger group. And that larger group of people who commit suicide with guns is a larger mental health issue, but it is one that I think the NRA should work on. I don't think govt intervention or a law will fix it, I think a soft approach is a the best solution.
Moose-Knuckle
05-29-14, 03:11
Is it just me, or has the MSM pretty much gone cold on this? It isn't even on the front page of CNN? Which is a shame since I think there are potential lessons to be learned from it.
My hypothesis is that mentally disturbed people (most of them on SSRIs- though I don't know the cause and effect here) commit suicide, often with a gun. In a small fraction of these cases, they go out and kill other people first. Mass shooters are not some out-of-the-blue occurrence, they are just a small subset of a larger group. And that larger group of people who commit suicide with guns is a larger mental health issue, but it is one that I think the NRA should work on. I don't think govt intervention or a law will fix it, I think a soft approach is a the best solution.
Yeah the MSM is moving on from this due to the fact only three of the victims were killed with a firearm and those three were shot with ban compliant mags and not "high-capacity" mags. Kind of hard to argue for more gun control when half of his victims were stabbed with a knife and several more were ran over by a car.
I don't think the NRA should touch suicide. They are lobbyists that fight for gun rights and promote gun safety through varies programs. There are plenty of suicide intervention programs out there.
Yeah the MSM is moving on from this due to the fact only three of the victims were killed with a firearm and those three were shot with ban compliant mags and not "high-capacity" mags. Kind of hard to argue for more gun control when half of his victims were stabbed with a knife and several more were ran over by a car.
I don't think the NRA should touch suicide. They are lobbyists that fight for gun rights and promote gun safety through varies programs. There are plenty of suicide intervention programs out there.
I can see where there would be a perception and image but I do ponder if they could augment their influence through strategic alliances nonetheless. Anything veteran related for instance.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
Sgt Santoro truly enjoys his art. :cool:
Mods/Staff should only be allowed to beat down as much as they contribute. Some of the crew are contributors to discussion, yet others just pop up when it's time to flex muscle.
I volunteer to Mod the Mods! :cool:
This is being used by California Democrats as another "reason" to push gun control/confiscation agenda:
This was an energy bill, but through the CA process of "Gut and amend" is now a very dangerous attack on 2nd Amendment rights:
http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB1014
Summary of the most retarded parts:
...This bill would establish a procedure to obtain a gun violence restraining order and, when applicable, a firearm seizure warrant, when a person poses a significant risk of personal injury to himself or herself or others by possessing a firearm...
...this bill would require law enforcement to retain the firearm for a period not to exceed one year, would make ownership or possession, the purchase or receipt, or attempted purchase or receipt of a firearm by that person a misdemeanor for a period up to one year, and would require the court to notify the Department of Justice, as specified...
18102. (a) The magistrate, before issuing the gun violence restraining order, may examine on oath, the person seeking the order and any witnesses the person produces, and shall take his or her affidavit or affidavits in writing, and cause the affidavit or affidavits to be subscribed by the parties making them.
(b) In determining whether grounds for a gun violence restraining order exist, the magistrate shall consider all of the following:
.....
(7) Evidence of recent acquisition of firearms or other deadly weapons.
(d) The affidavit or affidavits shall set forth the facts tending to establish the grounds of the application, or probable cause for believing that they exist.
(e) In lieu of the written affidavit required in subdivision (a), the magistrate may take an oral statement under oath using the procedures prescribed in Section 1526.
Under this provision, basically anyone can turn in someone else for any reason and probable cause for confiscating weapons is just purchasing a weapon. This is insane.
Yes, it is California, but California demographics are where the rest of the US seems to be heading. In Las Vegas, we have too many damned idiot CA transplants that want to bring their ideology with them. I know that Colorado has suffered from this plague as has Travis County.
And there you have it, Gun Control spreading like a Cancer and does not Discriminate.
No matter what, they will see it thru til the end.
I hope they push more bad policy through in that shit hole State. Let them all rot.
I hope they push more bad policy through in that shit hole State. Let them all rot.
The problem is that you can't contain it just in California. Look at what happened in Colorado and the results of both recent presidential elections. Do you think that a President Hillary (may God not strike me down for just the thought of that), wouldn't use California's laws as a model for federal legislation? The 1994 AWB is an example of that. Yes, California is hopeless and a lost cause for sensible leadership. But this is a cancer that spreads. You can see California as what the rest of the US could look like in ten years - the demographics and voting patterns point to this.
The problem is that you can't contain it just in California. Look at what happened in Colorado and the results of both recent presidential elections.
I disagree. California is a perfect example of retardation run out of control. It's an example for free States of what can happen when you let lunatics run the State.
The tide has moved more towards gun rights. Even Chicago is forced to allow gun sales now. They're still blocking it with bureaucratic nonsense, but they are forced to allow it.
In CO, they booted two of those cock roach politicians.
Yes, but large states like California and New York run national policy and national elections. In California the agenda is run from idiots in LA and SF. That is where there is a big population, so that is where you have more reps drawn from. If I use the example of where we have a house in San Diego County, our area is very conservative (our Congressman is Issa), and our State Rep is Rocky Chavez (Little Lebowsky's very capable Father in Law). Area-wise, the district size is about the same as the Santa Monica area in LA. We have one state assemblyman, they have seven. We have one Congressman, they have three (includes some intertwining districts). All are far left socialists. It makes no difference what we want since we are outnumbered on any votes. In national politics, the good people of Arizona only have 10 electoral votes and California has 55. California's electoral votes are winner take all and that represents LA and SF. If you add in the haul from New York, Illinois, etc. that are Dem strongholds, it becomes a tougher issue with national elections. Tyranny of the few and all that...
Yes, the tide has turned in some respects, but it takes only one incident and overhype from the left-leaning media to reignite the "debate" (there is no debate really it is rule by edict by one side). It is also only one Supreme Court Justice appointed by Obama or Hillary to change things radically as well.
This California bill shows the reality of what the left thinks: just the purchase of a gun qualifies you as "dangerous to others" and is cause for confiscation. With that mentality, there is no debate.
Summary of the most retarded parts:
...This bill would establish a procedure to obtain a gun violence restraining order and, when applicable, a firearm seizure warrant, when a person poses a significant risk of personal injury to himself or herself or others by possessing a firearm...
...this bill would require law enforcement to retain the firearm for a period not to exceed one year, would make ownership or possession, the purchase or receipt, or attempted purchase or receipt of a firearm by that person a misdemeanor for a period up to one year, and would require the court to notify the Department of Justice, as specified...
18102. (a) The magistrate, before issuing the gun violence restraining order, may examine on oath, the person seeking the order and any witnesses the person produces, and shall take his or her affidavit or affidavits in writing, and cause the affidavit or affidavits to be subscribed by the parties making them.
(b) In determining whether grounds for a gun violence restraining order exist, the magistrate shall consider all of the following:
.....
(7) Evidence of recent acquisition of firearms or other deadly weapons.
(d) The affidavit or affidavits shall set forth the facts tending to establish the grounds of the application, or probable cause for believing that they exist.
(e) In lieu of the written affidavit required in subdivision (a), the magistrate may take an oral statement under oath using the procedures prescribed in Section 1526.
You quoted that slightly out of context. It should be:
"(c) In determining whether grounds for a gun violence restraining order exist, the magistrate may consider any of the following:
...
(7) Evidence of recent acquisition of firearms or other deadly weapons"
It's not as bad as you wrote. With only (c)(7), there is no significant risk of personal injury to himself or others.
Now of course it can be abused and probably will be abused. And it goes without saying that I disagree with it. But they haven't proposed a law that can get you banned from owning a firearm just because you bought a firearm.
You quoted that slightly out of context. It should be:
"(c) In determining whether grounds for a gun violence restraining order exist, the magistrate may consider any of the following:
...
(7) Evidence of recent acquisition of firearms or other deadly weapons"
It's not as bad as you wrote. With only (c)(7), there is no significant risk of personal injury to himself or others.
Now of course it can be abused and probably will be abused. And it goes without saying that I disagree with it. But they haven't proposed a law that can get you banned from owning a firearm just because you bought a firearm.
My copy and paste skill are probably lacking, but perhaps you put too much faith in California judges. The track record of 2nd Amendment understanding is not very good there. This provides a mechanism that they can ( 'may") consider the purchase of firearm or other "dangerous weapon" (maybe if you look at FBI statistics a hammer purchased at Home Depot too?) as a means to enact a restraining order that confiscates firearms on the verbal "testimony" of "someone". This opens some huge areas of abuse and it is designed to be abused. As an example, if I have a dispute over a parking place with my neighbor and he knows, from snooping in my garage windows, that I possibly own weapons, he can say "that guy is nuts" and that is enough cause for a magistrate to consider issuing a RO. In CA, if you're a resident and have purchased firearms in recent years, there is a registration of that purchase.
This bill does not say "upon the diagnosis by a qualified mental health professional" or provide some qualification for opinions of soundness of mind. Listing the purchase of weapons as a condition opens Pandora's Box.
FromMyColdDeadHand
05-29-14, 15:01
In concept these things are fine, its in the details that it gets screwed up. Just another way for a vindictive wife to screw over her soon-to-be exhusband. This is why I don't facebook about guns, I don't talk to people about guns unless I'm pretty sure I know where they stand. This is why I hate it when they try to list gun owners and CWW holders. Got a beef with someone, check the registry and make a claim. I wouldn't put it past the anti's to use the lists and this process to just harrass gun owners.
That's why I said the NRA should get a program going that is not based on a law. Sure, the NRA can't solve the mental health issues, but a "Gun Buddies" solution to holding friends gun in some form is better than having the Sheriff come knocking. Of course, you couldn't do that in CO with the stupid background check laws.
Passing laws is what Progressives do to feel better, do 'something' and punt the problem to the next crisis- often made by the last law. Get out of that event, hype, crisis, legislation retard-o-loop and use some dissimilar tactics to take this out of congress and the state houses.
All these laws will do it make people reluctant to get mental health care and some sheriffs are going to get shot trying to take someones guns- all for no real change in risk- but the progressives move one step closer.
Of course, these laws can only work if we know who has all the guns, so we really need to register them.....
Stop saying 'No' and come up with REAL commonsense solutions, not the latest $50,000,000.00 pay-turf Bloomberg dementia. If we just stand here and go "Nothing would have stopped it," someone will just go for the 'easy' (WRONG) answer from the progressives.
In concept these things are fine, its in the details that it gets screwed up. Just another way for a vindictive wife to screw over her soon-to-be exhusband. This is why I don't facebook about guns, I don't talk to people about guns unless I'm pretty sure I know where they stand. This is why I hate it when they try to list gun owners and CWW holders. Got a beef with someone, check the registry and make a claim. I wouldn't put it past the anti's to use the lists and this process to just harrass gun owners.
That's why I said the NRA should get a program going that is not based on a law. Sure, the NRA can't solve the mental health issues, but a "Gun Buddies" solution to holding friends gun in some form is better than having the Sheriff come knocking. Of course, you couldn't do that in CO with the stupid background check laws.
Passing laws is what Progressives do to feel better, do 'something' and punt the problem to the next crisis- often made by the last law. Get out of that event, hype, crisis, legislation retard-o-loop and use some dissimilar tactics to take this out of congress and the state houses.
All these laws will do it make people reluctant to get mental health care and some sheriffs are going to get shot trying to take someones guns- all for no real change in risk- but the progressives move one step closer.
Of course, these laws can only work if we know who has all the guns, so we really need to register them.....
Stop saying 'No' and come up with REAL commonsense solutions, not the latest $50,000,000.00 pay-turf Bloomberg dementia. If we just stand here and go "Nothing would have stopped it," someone will just go for the 'easy' (WRONG) answer from the progressives.
How do you figure? Everything previously posted regarding the CA proposals comes across as purely gestapo in nature, only written to made it sound like its "reasonable". They want bans, registration, and eventually confiscation. Only they can't write the ending until the rest of the story is written first.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
FromMyColdDeadHand
05-30-14, 01:03
How do you figure? Everything previously posted regarding the CA proposals comes across as purely gestapo in nature, only written to made it sound like its "reasonable". They want bans, registration, and eventually confiscation. Only they can't write the ending until the rest of the story is written first.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
I said 'in conecpt'- the idea that you can remove the risk posed by violent crazy people. Wrap a nice legislative name around it and then ask people if violent crazy people should have guns.
Are you saying that you want crazy, violent people to have guns?
See what I did there? That's why we need a non-legislative alternative to being able to be labelled as giving guns to crazy people, or letting them have them, or doing nothing about it.
Either outflank your opponents or be defined, fixed and obliterated by them.
So, is it over? Things seem to have settled down and media coverage of this tragic event has fallen by the wayside. While the news media tried to make the story about guns I don't think many were buying into their schemes. I think what really did it for most was the media's attempt to focus only on those killed by the handguns while rationalizing away the murders of those killed by other means.
So, is it over? Things seem to have settled down and media coverage of this tragic event has fallen by the wayside. While the news media tried to make the story about guns I don't think many were buying into their schemes. I think what really did it for most was the media's attempt to focus only on those killed by the handguns while rationalizing away the murders of those killed by other means.
Gun background check bill co-sponsored by Rep. Peter King approved in House:
http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/gun-background-check-bill-co-sponsored-by-rep-peter-king-approved-in-house-1.8267044
So, is it over? Things seem to have settled down and media coverage of this tragic event has fallen by the wayside. While the news media tried to make the story about guns I don't think many were buying into their schemes. I think what really did it for most was the media's attempt to focus only on those killed by the handguns while rationalizing away the murders of those killed by other means.
Now the libtards are trying to make it out to be "white privilege" that caused this, even though the SOB was half asian. Its similar to them calling George Zimmerman "white-hispanic". Does that mean the President is a "white-african american"?
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/379057/white-privilege-causes-everything-charles-c-w-cooke
FromMyColdDeadHand
05-30-14, 11:22
Gun background check bill co-sponsored by Rep. Peter King approved in House:
http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/gun-background-check-bill-co-sponsored-by-rep-peter-king-approved-in-house-1.8267044
So no changes in BGCs, just more money for NICS checks? Sounds like a smart move, especially if the money comes from things we don't like. If NICS checks go faster, who is going to complain? ;)
So no changes in BGCs, just more money for NICS checks?
Therein lies the problem - no one seems to know what exactly the money is supposed to be spent on.
Faster BGC's? They don't seem to take too long for me.
Therein lies the problem - no one seems to know what exactly the money is supposed to be spent on.
Faster BGC's? They don't seem to take too long for me.
Politically motivated for Peter King to show his constituents that he is for "common sense" (in obama language) gun control. When the article includes a quote from his challenger about how he "has previously defended the gun industry", you know that gun control is something his left-leaning constituents support. Since there is no specific places where money is designated to "improve" the system, this is basically politically motivated pork. The money will likely just go into a general fund or for "administrative" costs. Nevertheless, more money wasted.
Moose-Knuckle
05-30-14, 15:01
Now the libtards are trying to make it out to be "white privilege" that caused this, even though the SOB was half asian. Its similar to them calling George Zimmerman "white-hispanic". Does that mean the President is a "white-african american"?
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/379057/white-privilege-causes-everything-charles-c-w-cooke
He nails it here:
So: When a white guy shoots up a school, white privilege is to blame. When a half-Asian-half-white guy shoots up a college town, white privilege is to blame. When a black guy shoots up a military installation, white privilege is to blame. Half-Asians are white for all intents and purposes, as are white-Hispanics. But our mixed-race president is a “black man in the White House.”
Now the libtards are trying to make it out to be "white privilege" that caused this, even though the SOB was half asian. Its similar to them calling George Zimmerman "white-hispanic". Does that mean the President is a "white-african american"?
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/379057/white-privilege-causes-everything-charles-c-w-cooke
And here I thought poverty was the cause of this sort of thing. Remember the war on poverty?
And here I thought poverty was the cause of this sort of thing. Remember the war on poverty?
As successful as the war on drugs and the war on cancer. Which is to say, a total failure by any measure. The way to fix is: throw more money at it. :help:
Now the libtards are trying to make it out to be "white privilege" that caused this, even though the SOB was half asian. Its similar to them calling George Zimmerman "white-hispanic". Does that mean the President is a "white-african american"?
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/379057/white-privilege-causes-everything-charles-c-w-cooke
Well naturally. The 2A is racist afterall...
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
I'm confused. Can someone give me an accurate re-cap of the death toll?
My current understanding:
- 7 deaths total (including the killer)
- 6 deaths that matter
- 3 stabbed
- 1 ran over
- 2 shot
Is this correct?
Same place, multiple murders, but the weapon used not interesting enough (no evil guns involved) to get the splashy coverage, and perp off in just a few years:
"On February 23, 2001, David Attias, a University of California-Santa Barbara freshman, "plowed his turbo-charged Saab into a group of young adults in the same Isla Vista neighborhood of the coastal community, killing four and permanently injuring another before climbing atop the car and declaring himself 'the Angel of Death.' Charged with murder, he was found not guilty by reason of insanity and sent to a state mental institution. He was released in 2012, having been locked away for slightly more than two years for each of his dead victims. 'He’s out because he got treatment and he finally learned what he needed to say,' said Sally Divis, whose son, Christopher, was just 20 when he was run down by Attias. 'Do I actually think he’s safe? Not really.'"
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/05/30/01-santa-barbara-killer-walks-free-as-families-relive-carnage-13-years-later/
Same place, multiple murders, but the weapon used not interesting enough (no evil guns involved) to get the splashy coverage, and perp off in just a few years:
"On February 23, 2001, David Attias, a University of California-Santa Barbara freshman, "plowed his turbo-charged Saab into a group of young adults in the same Isla Vista neighborhood of the coastal community, killing four and permanently injuring another before climbing atop the car and declaring himself 'the Angel of Death.' Charged with murder, he was found not guilty by reason of insanity and sent to a state mental institution. He was released in 2012, having been locked away for slightly more than two years for each of his dead victims. 'He’s out because he got treatment and he finally learned what he needed to say,' said Sally Divis, whose son, Christopher, was just 20 when he was run down by Attias. 'Do I actually think he’s safe? Not really.'"
I never even heard about this one. No media outcry to ban those "assault cars". No slogans of "Not One More... murderous car rampage..."
The thing that is bothering me most about the media coverage of this latest atrocity is that they keep referring to it as "The Shooting Rampage in S.B.", or "the shooter", or "the shootings...". Um. Hello? The guy did more than shoot. I understand the reason why they focus on the gun, but does the general public?
There's a new report out saying he was taking Xanax just prior.
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2014/06/ucsb-shooter-elliot-rodger-xanax-made-him-withdrawn-lonely-isolated-anxious/
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.