Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

[T-Rexx]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

This man was mentally ill. It appears more and more the problem is mental illness.

Maybe the problem is that fewer and fewer people are getting treatment, due to lack of insurance.

 

[palbert]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

I bring to this thread the concerns I have so aggressively addressed in the NSA/FBI/DEA/DOJ/surveillance thread(s).

This incident makes me wonder if I need worry at all. There are enough markers (I think they call them) here to make a security officer's skin crawl. Instead, our security elements at the facility are dead or wounded.

Is the government so unwieldy that markers - from its own data, if accessed - cannot be identified?

The government can collect all of the communication data on a miscreant it wants, but if the government doesn't realize he's a miscreant in the first place, what purpose is served by collecting the data?

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

[/RANT]

 

[Telstra]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

Here we go again.
Shooting death ... it doesn't raise my eyebrows.

There is no shock reactions anymore for gun mass murders.
My reaction is, oh well, next story please ...

 

[Jack Springer]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

Maybe the problem is that fewer and fewer people are getting treatment, due to lack of insurance.

This latest asshole had all the insurance of the federal government and military. My guess is that the military and fed government wants to be PC and not address the issues he has. Very similar to the asshole that killed at the people at Ft. Hood -- the US Army looked the other way after all the clues.

 

[Rolyo85]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

Jack, do you know how much psychiatric care costs, especially for someone who needs medication and may need occasional commitment to in-care or psychiatric hospital wards? And do you know how restricted insurance coverage of this kind of care is?

It's amazing that just on the gun issue, absolutely every care in the world about invasion of privacy and enormous government spending goes completely out the window for conservatives who would prefer absolutely anything to sensible changes in our gun policy.

Also, shifting the entire discussion to "let's improve mental healthcare" would do nothing about people who had no previous record for anyone to worry about and suddenly snap, or go through a bad divorce or child custody battle, or get drunk at a bar and get into a fight that goes too far. Nor would it do anything about the people with access to guns and come from strata of America where there's a cocky self-reliant rejection of the need for mental healthcare, such as the military dad of the Columbine shooter who knew his son had issues and didn't need no stinkin shrinks for it.

The people to most worry about as far as their mental state and their access to guns are the people who are not going to seek care, stay in care, or stay on medication anyway, no matter how much you improve the state of mental healthcare.

Let me explain it to you. Every care in the world about invasion of privacy and enormous government spending goes completely out the window for conservatives, because to them mental health care is NOT a real thing. It's like "video-games create violence" - a scapegoat, a DEFLECTION. It's not meant to be a real thing, a real effort to address a real problem. To them these horrifying events "just happen" and since it's obvious it could not possibly be gun laws at fault because 'Murica, there is no rhyme or reason to them. They just are, like acts of God (which also just are, since global warming is a sham). So there is no cognitive dissonance to them. When they say "mental health is the issue", what they mean is "don't touch our guns!". Of course nothing else could be done anyway, so they don't worry about consequences from doing it.

 

[Jack Springer]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

I bring to this thread the concerns I have so aggressively addressed in the NSA/FBI/DEA/DOJ/surveillance thread(s).

This incident makes me wonder if I need worry at all. There are enough markers (I think they call them) here to make a security officer's skin crawl. Instead, our security elements at the facility are dead or wounded.

Is the government so unwieldy that markers - from its own data, if accessed - cannot be identified?

The government can collect all of the communication data on a miscreant it wants, but if the government doesn't realize he's a miscreant in the first place, what purpose is served by collecting the data?

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

[/RANT]

Thanks ... a good rant. The US Government now collects so much information they don't have the ability or skill to know what to do with it after they have it. ... and they want more.

 

[Jack Springer]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

Let me explain it to you. Every care in the world about invasion of privacy and enormous government spending goes completely out the window for conservatives, because to them mental health care is NOT a real thing. It's like "video-games create violence" - a scapegoat, a DEFLECTION. It's not meant to be a real thing, a real effort to address a real problem. To them these horrifying events "just happen" and since it's obvious it could not possibly be gun laws at fault because 'Murica, there is no rhyme or reason to them. They just are, like acts of God (which also just are, since global warming is a sham). So there is no cognitive dissonance to them. When they say "mental health is the issue", what they mean is "don't touch our guns!". Of course nothing else could be done anyway, so they don't worry about consequences from doing it.

Again, the man worked for the federal government. He had access to mental health professionals.

 

[xbuzzerx]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

Again, the man worked for the federal government. He had access to mental health professionals.

And he spurned it.

Thanks for proving my point that improving mental healthcare is a non-solution to someone going on a gun rampage.

Look what the kid did in Connecticut when his mom told him she wanted to put him into mental healthcare.

 

[palbert]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

And he spurned it.

Thanks for proving my point that improving mental healthcare is a non-solution to someone going on a gun rampage.

Look what the kid did in Connecticut when his mom told him she wanted to put him into mental healthcare.

It takes someone stronger than these people are to meaningfully seek and accept therapy.

They have demonstrated the horrific easy way out.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

Of course, because that's so much easier than background checks.

By the way, snapping from too much emotional pressure and a bad streak is NOT a mental illness. It could happen to anyone who is put in straining circumstances. I am not talking specifically about this guy, but in general. It's very convenient to label all of these people "mentally ill", but I bet half of them were ordinary folks up until the moment they snapped.

Which is why a new Militia Act should provide for mental health resources for everyone, any time.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

Maybe the problem is that fewer and fewer people are getting treatment, due to lack of insurance.

That's probably a big part of it. But another big part is that even if one does have insurance, actually getting care in a crisis is virtually impossible -- ever since Reagan trashed the mental health care infrastructure, people have been on their own, to the detriment of not just them but everyone else.

The GOP have become incredible social Darwinists.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

I bring to this thread the concerns I have so aggressively addressed in the NSA/FBI/DEA/DOJ/surveillance thread(s).

This incident makes me wonder if I need worry at all. There are enough markers (I think they call them) here to make a security officer's skin crawl. Instead, our security elements at the facility are dead or wounded.

Is the government so unwieldy that markers - from its own data, if accessed - cannot be identified?

The government can collect all of the communication data on a miscreant it wants, but if the government doesn't realize he's a miscreant in the first place, what purpose is served by collecting the data?

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

[/RANT]

As with the police officer who recently shot a man running to him for help, out government has become quite good at putting firearms into the hands of people whose competence they never actually even checked. It's a sobering thought that people actually want the government deciding who should and who should not have firearms, when the evidence suggests they're very bad at it.

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

This latest asshole had all the insurance of the federal government and military. My guess is that the military and fed government wants to be PC and not address the issues he has. Very similar to the asshole that killed at the people at Ft. Hood -- the US Army looked the other way after all the clues.

Not very competent at providing for the security of a free state....

 

[Kulindahr]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

And he spurned it.

Thanks for proving my point that improving mental healthcare is a non-solution to someone going on a gun rampage.

Look what the kid did in Connecticut when his mom told him she wanted to put him into mental healthcare.

The question is whether anyone carrying a firearm around, or with access to do so, should even have the choice to avoid getting care.

Keeping and bearing arms is a right, but it is also, in terms of being a member of the militia, a responsibility. Those choosing to carry must have the conviction of their choice, and that includes being sure that they are actually competent to participate in providing for the security of a free state. Those not competent should be eager to be denied access to arms, knowing that for them, such access is a detriment to the security of a free state.

We need to begin thinking about this altogether differently, not in terms of politics as usual, but in the terms the FFs and Framers thought in, that citizenship includes responsibility. We have to begin at the point of membership in the militia, and the solemn duty involved there. Wayne La Pierre loves to cry about rights, but he rarely ever utters a single word about responsibility -- but the two cannot be separated. Someone exercising the right to keep and bear arms by carrying in public must also acknowledge and accept the responsibility of having volunteered to participate in providing for the security of a free state, and that means accepting proper discipline.

 

[rareboy]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

The new face of terrorism. Large targeted terrorist acts like 9/11 are now too hard to carry out. We will see more of this kind of thing.

Boy....I'll bet you feel more than a little ridiculous now.

 

[palbert]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

That's probably a big part of it. But another big part is that even if one does have insurance, actually getting care in a crisis is virtually impossible -- ever since Reagan trashed the mental health care infrastructure, people have been on their own, to the detriment of not just them but everyone else.

The GOP have become incredible social Darwinists.

I'm not so sure how to lay this at Reagan's feet.

I see the genesis of the present problem as O'Connor v. Donaldson:

O'Connor v. Donaldson, 422 U.S. 563 (1975), was a landmark decision in mental health law. The United States Supreme Court ruled that a state cannot constitutionally confine a non-dangerous individual who is capable of surviving safely in freedom by themselves or with the help of willing and responsible family members or friends. Since the trial court jury found, upon ample evidence, that petitioner did so confine respondent, the Supreme Court upheld the trial court's conclusion that petitioner had violated respondent's right to liberty.

I think the "non-dangerous" part needs to be revisited. The descendants of the decision, including the Baker Act, fail to take into account immediacy.

 

[Jack Springer]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

From this morning's news it appears that the man recently went to the VA for mental health help over hearing voices.

So access to mental health help is not the issue.

He got the guns he used from within the building.

It seems the problem is screening and his secret access.

The people who investigated and granted his access are the ones in trouble.

 

[palbert]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

Reports that the shooter who killed a dozen people in Monday’s Washington Navy Yard attack was hearing voices raises the possibility of mental illness -- but it’s not a diagnosis, experts say.

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/not-diagnosis-voices-head-more-common-thought-4B11186594

I have a lot of trouble with this. Hearing voices? Something is very obviously wrong. "Voices" seem to not tell one to garden.

 

[opinterph]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

He got the guns he used from within the building.

Recent reports seem to question that assumption. One commentator I heard yesterday even suggested that the assailant brought a shotgun and 2 handguns with him into the facility.

Contrary to previous reports that had been widely circulated, [the gunman at the historic Washington Navy Yard] did not use an AR-15 semiautomatic weapon. [LA Times]

It is believed that [the gunman at the historic Washington Navy Yard] had rented an AR-15, but returned it before Monday morning's shootings. Authorities are still investigating precisely how many weapons Alexis had access to and when. [CNN]

 

[Jack Springer]

Re: Breaking News: Shooting At U.S. Navy Yard In Washington, D.C.

Sorry, I was wrong, he did purchase a shotgun as recently as Saturday ... but not sure he had it with him.