gun control...

[rpm]

All the psych and legal problems were very recent. They probably didn't have time to make it on the background check yet.

This guy was a nutbag and there is no way to prevent nutbags from happening. They will find a way to act out.

[Widewing]

You can't legislate crazy...But you can get those declared mentally ill by a court or magistrate into a database that kicks them out on a background check.

My regards,

Widewing

[Toad]

Originally posted by moot
Stalking is far enough to raise a flag.  Maybe not void eligibility by itself, but in general it should trigger further reviews; without a doubt in his case.
It's not "meangingless".

He was accused of stalking, was he not? The woman declined to press charges. So are you guys saying that accusal alone is enough to deny a right? Accusal? That's all it takes? You can see where that leads, right?

[Toad]

Originally posted by Maverick
There has been an allegation of stalking. Does anyone know if a report was filed and was there any interest in prosecution? Was there an arrest?

[/b]


From NPR:

Campus police now say that Seung-Hui Cho — blamed for Monday's shootings at Virginia Tech — was accused of harrassing two female students in 2005. Neither woman pressed charges and he was not arrested.

From MTV.com

In the press conference held Wednesday morning, Flinchum said police received a call in November of 2005 from an unidentified female student who said she had received "annoying" phone calls and had had a personal run-in with Cho. Police investigated the incident and no charges were filed.

Weeks later, on December 13, 2005, Flinchum said VT police received another complaint after Cho instant-messaged another female student. Although he didn't threaten her, she spoke with police and asked that Cho not have any more contact with her. No charges were filed in that incident either.

Secondly, in regards to the mental health allegations.

[/b]


US News:

Despite being temporarily detained at a mental health facility in 2005, Virginia Tech gunman Cho Seung-Hui's name was not added to the federal database meant to prevent the mentally ill from obtaining handguns because he was never formally committed to the facility, U.S. News's Will Sullivan has learned.

Yeager, which of these incidents, if any, would you extend to the entire populace as incidents that prevent the purchase of a firearm?

The system either failed because he was incorrectly not entered into the data base as a mentally ill person when he should have been or because the system does not recognize people like this as mentally ill, ie: the things he did failed to trigger inclusion in the database.

Allow me to posit another question: Had this sick jack donkey been denied the purchase of a firearm at a gun store, do you really think he would not have been able to buy the same or a quite similar firearm on the open market?

[Maverick]

Toad,

You obviously understood why I asked the questions that I did. Wanting to have a system to fix things and knowing what it takes to even think of the ramifications is harder than wishing for it.

Given the news "system" we have in the country it's difficult to know which has the real story regarding the mental health eval. If indeed there was a court order and an adjudication (court finding) that he was diagnosed as mentally ill and a danger (no matter to whom) he should have been flagged and entered in the data base for a records check. That takes mere minutes and should have happened right after the finding. Like I said earlier it seems the system failed this guy and more importantly, his victims. The problem needs to be identified and fixed.

[Yeager]

Yeager, which of these incidents, if any, would you extend to the entire populace as incidents that prevent the purchase of a firearm?
====
Toad I dont know for sure but I would rather that you, I and the NRA take control the flow of the discussion thats happening all over the country today rather than let boxer, schumer, kennedy and the other euro socialists control the flow.  One thing I believe for sure, this mass murder shooting type of attack is going to happen again and again, and its going to get worse.  If all the firearms community is going to do after every insane attack is recite phrases from the founding fathers then put bumper stickers on their cars then the  average american will eventually band together and overrule the 2nd amendment as a nation.

We need to do more as a collective group of gun rights enthusiaist and activists to help determine how we can control firearm access to the mentally unstable and ill.  People who are unstable and ill have no business accessing firearms.  A way needs to be devised that at least makes it less likely to happen.  We need to be pro-active in this regard.

[john9001]

all this talk about "gun checks" and "mental health" are moot, his parents live near DC, DC has a total gun ban so it should have a thriving black market trade in guns, no background check, just cash.

but for the gun banners in here, would it make you feel better if he blew up the building instead?

[Yeager]

John, chill pill dude.  calm down and discuss.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Yeager
 A way needs to be devised that at least makes it less likely to happen.  We need to be pro-active in this regard.

That way is already in place.

If he had been adjudicated mentally ill, the NICS system should have caught him.

There isn't going to be any method to "precog" crime, Tom Cruise's movie notwithstanding.

Check this list and tell me how many of the perps had been officially determined to be mentally ill prior to the killing? The fact that they did these things sort of proves they WERE mentally ill, but how many of them had been designated as mentally ill?

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777958.html


How many of them got their weapons in a legal fashion?

Basically, Yeag, any system you put in place will eventually either be circumvented by the perp or it will fail in some way.

Even the Englishman that killed at Dunblane had been pretty much singled out as a loon and a probable perv. Even the draconian English system failed there.

I'm sorry but it's going to keep happening and probably at a more frequent rate as we take each deranged perp and make a big media fuss over him, delving into his life from birth to the grave.

Grind 'em up for hog food, never publish their names or pictures. Erase them from history. Maybe, just maybe that might slow it down a bit. But no system devised is going to completely stop it.

[FrodeMk3]

I'm gonna add to what Toad posted. In the Package that he sent to NBC, The Gunman cited that the two in the Columbine shootings were "Martyrs."

IF that makes this a copycat crime, then we are gonna have to do something about the media as well...They are going to have to limit they're reporting to just basic facts in such cases.

[lasersailor184]

4 Hours time and people are damn near throwing their rights away.


You give an inch, and they take a mile.

[Shuckins]

Tthe insane rage of that young South Korean, and the long-tern, premeditated planning that went into his attack, indicate that, even if the federal firearm's checking system had prevented him from purchasing his firearms, he would have found a way.  He might have become a suicide bomber.  In which case, the effects would have been the same.

Regards, Shuckins

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Originally posted by Shuckins
Tthe insane rage of that young South Korean, and the long-tern, premeditated planning that went into his attack, indicate that, even if the federal firearm's checking system had prevented him from purchasing his firearms, he would have found a way.  He might have become a suicide bomber.  In which case, the effects would have been the same.

Regards, Shuckins

Or then again, he might have gone out on a stabbing rampage instead in which case he'd quickly be subdued by the campus security.

The easyer it is to get a weapon (no permits, applications etc.) the more likely an insane person is prone to obtain one in a spur of the moment. Then all it takes is the next flip of the switch..

[lasersailor184]

Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Or then again, he might have gone out on a stabbing rampage instead in which case he'd quickly be subdued by the campus security.

The easyer it is to get a weapon (no permits, applications etc.) the more likely an insane person is prone to obtain one in a spur of the moment. Then all it takes is the next flip of the switch..

The availability of weapons is only deterred by your imagination.

There are items out there that could possibly be far more deadly then a Gun.





September 11th.

[moot]

Originally posted by Toad
He was accused of stalking, was he not? The woman declined to press charges. So are you guys saying that accusal alone is enough to deny a right? Accusal? That's all it takes? You can see where that leads, right?

Toad, I'm suggesting the same thing as Widewing.  I didn't say he should be refused just for that one supposed stalking, but that it should be taken into context (especially with the rest of his rap sheet that existed already), hence the need for a closer review before a decision is taken.
Unless it's the case that evaluation for firearm ownership is an all or nothing threshold sort of thing, everything must be accounted for in context.