Father of CA Mass Shooting Victim Blames NRA and Republicans

[OnePercenter]

Gun control doesn't completely work. It can only limit people doing these types of things. I can go back to the city I grew up in and get an assault rifle with no problem from some of my childhood friends. Criminals don't obey the law. Thats why they are criminals.

The fact that you know this is VERY telling.

No, it isn't.

Most of us who grew up outside of suburbia know at least a few criminals.

I was born and grew up in Vegas. My Father was in the casino business, so I know a few criminals also. But I don't run to those criminals to get guns.

 

[Rocko]

What makes you think the kid revealed something to them that would make them lock him up for 72 hours and what would have stopped him from doing it after he was released?

The fears his parents had, his mental illness, behavior, writings, youtube videos, etc. were reason enough for the cops to take him as a threat seriously. Bottom line is the cops choose to ignore the clues after being warned ahead of time.

You cant lock people up for that. Even if you did what would have stopped him from doing it after he got out?

I didn't say they should have locked him up. In the very least don't you think they should have kept an eye on him?

 

[Nutz]

The fears his parents had, his mental illness, behavior, writings, youtube videos, etc. were reason enough for the cops to take him as a threat seriously. Bottom line is the cops choose to ignore the clues after being warned ahead of time.

You cant lock people up for that. Even if you did what would have stopped him from doing it after he got out?

I didn't say they should have locked him up. In the very least don't you think they should have kept an eye on him?

A 24/7 detail on him...watching his every move. Listening to his phone calls. Monitor all of his computer usage....really?

 

[Asclepias]

The fears his parents had, his mental illness, behavior, writings, youtube videos, etc. were reason enough for the cops to take him as a threat seriously. Bottom line is the cops choose to ignore the clues after being warned ahead of time.

You cant lock people up for that. Even if you did what would have stopped him from doing it after he got out?

I didn't say they should have locked him up. In the very least don't you think they should have kept an eye on him?

Do you have any idea the number of people they would need to "keep and eye" on every nutcase in their jurisdiction? I once worked for a place that got bomb threats at least once a week. I cant imagine the amount of calls the police get.

 

[Asclepias]

The fact that you know this is VERY telling.

No, it isn't.

Most of us who grew up outside of suburbia know at least a few criminals.

I was born and grew up in Vegas. My Father was in the casino business, so I know a few criminals also. But I don't run to those criminals to get guns.

Thats a strawman. Who said I run to criminals to get guns? I said I could if i wanted to. I dont think civilians should have weapons with auto capability.

 

[Rocko]

You cant lock people up for that. Even if you did what would have stopped him from doing it after he got out?

I didn't say they should have locked him up. In the very least don't you think they should have kept an eye on him?

Do you have any idea the number of people they would need to "keep and eye" on every nutcase in their jurisdiction? I once worked for a place that got bomb threats at least once a week. I cant imagine the amount of calls the police get.

So what are you saying? Police don't monitor people they suspect people may commit violent crimes? Yes or no would suffice.

 

[Asclepias]

I didn't say they should have locked him up. In the very least don't you think they should have kept an eye on him?

Do you have any idea the number of people they would need to "keep and eye" on every nutcase in their jurisdiction? I once worked for a place that got bomb threats at least once a week. I cant imagine the amount of calls the police get.

So what are you saying? Police don't monitor people they suspect people may commit violent crimes? Yes or no would suffice.

You cant dictate the length of my answer. Its a little more complex than a yes or no. They have to have a reason to want to watch you. If they interviewed the kid and decided he was harmless, why would they watch him?

 

[OnePercenter]

I didn't say they should have locked him up. In the very least don't you think they should have kept an eye on him?

Do you have any idea the number of people they would need to "keep and eye" on every nutcase in their jurisdiction? I once worked for a place that got bomb threats at least once a week. I cant imagine the amount of calls the police get.

So what are you saying? Police don't monitor people they suspect people may commit violent crimes? Yes or no would suffice.

You mean there are enough cops to watch everyone they believe could do a bad thing?

 

[Asclepias]

Do you have any idea the number of people they would need to "keep and eye" on every nutcase in their jurisdiction? I once worked for a place that got bomb threats at least once a week. I cant imagine the amount of calls the police get.

So what are you saying? Police don't monitor people they suspect people may commit violent crimes? Yes or no would suffice.

You mean there are enough cops to watch everyone they believe could do a bad thing?

Not to mention they are suspicious of just about everyone due to their line of work.

 

[Rocko]

Do you have any idea the number of people they would need to "keep and eye" on every nutcase in their jurisdiction? I once worked for a place that got bomb threats at least once a week. I cant imagine the amount of calls the police get.

So what are you saying? Police don't monitor people they suspect people may commit violent crimes? Yes or no would suffice.

You cant dictate the length of my answer. Its a little more complex than a yes or no. They have to have a reason to want to watch you. If they interviewed the kid and decided he was harmless, why would they watch him?

I asked a simple question that is not more complicated than a simple yes or no answer.

In this particular case the evidence that they were dealing with a very disturbed person capable of doing harm was overwhelming from my point of view. The cops ether did not investigate sufficiently enough or showed a lapse of judgment IMO.

 

[Rocko]

Do you have any idea the number of people they would need to "keep and eye" on every nutcase in their jurisdiction? I once worked for a place that got bomb threats at least once a week. I cant imagine the amount of calls the police get.

So what are you saying? Police don't monitor people they suspect people may commit violent crimes? Yes or no would suffice.

You mean there are enough cops to watch everyone they believe could do a bad thing?

Where did anyone say that, dumbass?

 

[Nutz]

So this is where we are at.

Guns will never be banned, no matter how you interpret the 2nd Amendment...and any attempt to abridge that right would result in insurrection.

More gun control is an option, but it doesn't work...there are still mass murders.

We cannot watch suspects 24/7 and every American has the Constitutional right to due process.

Mass shootings are an epidemic. What is the root cause...it isn't gun availability, guns have always been available. What attitude has changed? Has our culture simply become violent? Is it TV, Video Games, Satan, God...

Any ideas?

 

[Asclepias]

So what are you saying? Police don't monitor people they suspect people may commit violent crimes? Yes or no would suffice.

You cant dictate the length of my answer. Its a little more complex than a yes or no. They have to have a reason to want to watch you. If they interviewed the kid and decided he was harmless, why would they watch him?

I asked a simple question that is not more complicated than a simple yes or no question.

In this particular case the evidence that they were dealing with a very disturbed person capable of doing harm was overwhelming from my point of view. The cops ether did not investigate sufficiently enough or showed a lapse of judgment IMO.

Thats what I was waiting to hear. Thats why I asked you if you had a recording of the police interview with him. How do you determine that if you dont know what happened?

 

[jon_berzerk]

I don't think that means the cops dropped the ball. Are you proposing that if someone reports a gun owner to police, that the police should abridge their right to own a gun? Slippery slope...next thing you know, if you hold a certain political ideology...you can't own a gun.

actually California is not to far off in that respect

in 2013 the cops in Los Angeles came and confiscated the firearms

of a lady that spent two days in a mental hold

no due process no warrant

Wearing bulletproof vests and carrying 40-caliber Glock pistols, nine California (STOCA1) Justice Department agents assembled outside a ranch-style house in a suburb east of Los Angeles. They were looking for a gun owner who’d recently spent two days in a mental hospital.

They knocked on the door and asked to come in. About 45 minutes later, they came away peacefully with three firearms.

the rest of the story is spin

If she'd taken the guns and killed people you and yours would be accusing the police of not doing enough.

no

there is such a thing as due process

 

[Rocko]

You cant dictate the length of my answer. Its a little more complex than a yes or no. They have to have a reason to want to watch you. If they interviewed the kid and decided he was harmless, why would they watch him?

I asked a simple question that is not more complicated than a simple yes or no question.

In this particular case the evidence that they were dealing with a very disturbed person capable of doing harm was overwhelming from my point of view. The cops ether did not investigate sufficiently enough or showed a lapse of judgment IMO.

Thats what I was waiting to hear. Thats why I asked you if you had a recording of the police interview with him. How do you determine that if you dont know what happened?

Give me a break. Of course I'm merely stating my opinion. It's not an unfounded opinion, it's certainly based on fact. Now I don't have all the facts, such as the police interviews, but I believe that I have enough facts that are damning enough to the action of the police or lack there of.

 

[Asclepias]

So this is where we are at.

Guns will never be banned, no matter how you interpret the 2nd Amendment...and any attempt to abridge that right would result in insurrection.

More gun control is an option, but it doesn't work...there are still mass murders.

We cannot watch suspects 24/7 and every American has the Constitutional right to due process.

Mass shootings are an epidemic. What is the root cause...it isn't gun availability, guns have always been available. What attitude has changed? Has our culture simply become violent? Is it TV, Video Games, Satan, God...

Any ideas?

People are desensitized to gun violence via the gaming industry, TV, etc. I remember as a angry teenager my grandpa shot a melon with a 12 gauge to show me what a gun would do to a human. That sobered me up pretty quickly. There is something wrong with the culture in the US that makes people resort to mass shootings. What I see is desperation and not having a way to deal with their issues. That usually brings out the worst in people everytime.

 

[Asclepias]

I asked a simple question that is not more complicated than a simple yes or no question.

In this particular case the evidence that they were dealing with a very disturbed person capable of doing harm was overwhelming from my point of view. The cops ether did not investigate sufficiently enough or showed a lapse of judgment IMO.

Thats what I was waiting to hear. Thats why I asked you if you had a recording of the police interview with him. How do you determine that if you dont know what happened?

Give me a break. Of course I'm merely stating my opinion. It's not an unfounded opinion, it's certainly based on fact. Now I don't have all the facts, such as the police interviews, but I believe that I have enough facts that are damning enough to the action of the police or lack there of.

It could turn out that the cops did drop the ball. I just dont see how you could determine that from the facts currently available.

 

[Noomi]

Father of victim: 'Too many have died' - CNN.com Video

Is this how it is going to be for now on...every time a nutcase shoots someone, is it really going to be the fault of the NRA and GOP? I don't get it. Is blaming everyone else but the culprit an excuse...is it simply political? What is the rationale or motivation to place the blame on everyone else but the person responsible?
Father of victim: 'Too many have died' - CNN.com Video

How about you blame the people who allowed him to access a gun in the first place?

 

[Nutz]

Father of victim: 'Too many have died' - CNN.com Video

Is this how it is going to be for now on...every time a nutcase shoots someone, is it really going to be the fault of the NRA and GOP? I don't get it. Is blaming everyone else but the culprit an excuse...is it simply political? What is the rationale or motivation to place the blame on everyone else but the person responsible?
Father of victim: 'Too many have died' - CNN.com Video

How about you blame the people who allowed him to access a gun in the first place?

I don't think they pulled the trigger.

 

[Tank]

How about you blame the people who allowed him to access a gun in the first place?

And those people who allowed him to access that knife too