Do these people bear any responsibility for the recent mass killing in the USA?

those people who love their guns more than they love the rest of all of you.

This is a man who, six weeks before the shootings, was adjudged by a psychiatrist to be in a semi-psychotic state. Are you telling me that no one else in the gun owning community had any inkling of his unbalance? No one to say "Hey, before he hurts himself or others, something must be done."

The question I'm asking here, as some of you have alluded, is, even though there isn't a direct connection between the happy bunch of gun owners pictured above and the guy who thought he was the JOKER, there is, I think, an indirect connection for which they must accept some of the responsibility.

For generations, Americans ignored drunk driving as something that happened, no big deal, a tragedy to be sure, if the drunk drove head-on into the vacationing family of five but nothing connected to the vast numbers of people who 1) drove cars and behaved responsibly and 2) really hoped that the drunk drivers would never affect their freedom to drive (after drinking or otherwise) .

It wasn't until a national campaign against drunk driving was begun in the 1970's that this society began to say "Yes, I see. If I know my friend is drunk, it's my responsibility to take his keys away and get him (and the rest of society) home safe.

Where does the responsibility for the Aurora Movie Theater shootings begin? This is a man who, six weeks before the shootings, was adjudged by a psychiatrist to be in a semi-psychotic state. Are you telling me that no one else in the gun owning community had any inkling of his unbalance? No one to say "Hey, before he hurts himself or others, something must be done."

The question I'm asking here, as some of you have alluded, is,
even though there isn't a direct connection between the happy
bunch of gun owners pictured above and the guy who thought
he was the JOKER, there is, I think, an indirect connection
for which they must accept some of the responsibility.

For generations, Americans ignored drunk driving as something that happened,
no big deal, a tragedy to be sure, if the drunk drove head-on into
the vacationing family of five but nothing connected to the vast numbers of people
who 1) drove cars and behaved responsibly and
2) really hoped that the drunk drivers would never affect their
freedom to drive (after drinking or otherwise) .

It wasn't until a national campaign against drunk driving was begun in the 1970's
that this society began to say "Yes, I see. If I know my friend is drunk,
it's my responsibility to take his keys away and get him (and the rest of society) home safe.

Where does the responsibility for the Aurora Movie Theater shootings begin?

This is a man who, six weeks before the shootings, was adjudged
by a psychiatrist to be in a semi-psychotic state. Are you telling me
that no one else in the gun owning community had any inkling
of his unbalance?

No one to say "Hey, before he hurts himself
or others, something must be done."

I would argue that the current crop of gun owners are cowards [????]
about coming forward, personally or legally, to confront those who
should not have guns in their possession.

Adian: I've known many people who would argue
that ANY person should be allowed to have weapons,

even automatic weapons, unless and UNTIL
they use them against another human being.

That always seems to me to be a bit too late,
we should ask former Member of Congress Giffords.
That is the condition of the gun culture of the USA:
we must hold onto our guns and if some bad things happen, so what, we have still managed to hold onto our guns.

That's essentially the position of the NRA:
unless someone acts illegally with a weapon in hand,
that person has the right to own and hold that weapon.

so, to continue our search: we got the killer>>>connected to the white supremacist group>>>>
Who's NEXT?

>>>who else knew that this bunch of wackos had major fire power and intended,
or said they intended, to use it against their enemies?
And who knew those people knew?

Follow through the folds of the gun community of America,
and, sooner or later, you will end up on the front porch
of those people who love their guns more than they love the rest of all of you.

Joe(they have no inclination to self-police)Nation

“If my art form is responsible for this shooting, how come no other art form is responsible in all of the other shootings?” asks Byron Calvert, a white power music producer and supporter. “The niggers are always rapping about killing white people, but no one complains about that.”

The question I'm asking here, as some of you have alluded, is, even though there isn't a direct connection between the happy bunch of gun owners pictured above and the guy who thought he was the JOKER, there is, I think, an indirect connection for which they must accept some of the responsibility.

Well yes, I think that they'd have to accept some of the responsibility
if they advocated [We can 't speak our minds any more ????] putting guns in the hands
of deluded and violently insane people.

But I don't know that's true - just because they believe that THEY have the right to own these firearms.

As I said, I DO think there should be more stringent gun laws,
including more thorough background checks on people who want to own guns.

I mean I had to have an enhanced CRB (criminal records bureau) check,
be fingerprinted and have a psychological evaluation including IQ test
to get my first job working with children.

It took all of one day for them to get the data from me to determine that I'd never committed a criminal offense AND did not display any tendency toward violence or criminality- it wasn't stressful at all or a huge inconvenience to me (as I had nothing to hide-I guess it would have been stressful if I had been pretending to be something I wasn't). Yes, I DID find it worrisome that James Holmes was able to get that much ammunition over the INTERNET for goodness sakes!

I also found it very perplexing and distressing that he was apparently under psychiatric care when he was able to walk into a gun shop or gun show and buy these weapons. That's what I MEAN!

There should be more stringent background checks.

But I don't think my brother, who owns a hunting rifle and hunts bears
any responsibility for what these mass murderers do.

For generations, Americans ignored drunk driving as something that happened, no big deal, a tragedy to be sure, if the drunk drove head-on into the vacationing family of five but nothing connected to the vast numbers of people who 1) drove cars and behaved responsibly and 2) really hoped that the drunk drivers would never affect their freedom to drive (after drinking or otherwise) .

Well, to drive you have to have a license and take a test, don't you?

And I'm sorry but I do believe that unless I'm standing there and watching someone drink til they're drunk and then get into a car, I CAN'T be responsible for their choice to drive drunk, because I'm not their to DO anything about it, and it SHOULDN'T affect my freedom to drive drunk.

It wasn't until a national campaign against drunk driving was begun in the 1970's that this society began to say "Yes, I see. If I know my friend is drunk, it's my responsibility to take his keys away and get him (and the rest of society) home safe.

Well, I don't know anything about what used to happen, because I didn't begin to drive until the late 70's. But I know that I always knew that if my friend was driving drunk, or swimming drunk, or about to handle a baby drunk or do anything drunk, it was my responsibility [ HOW did u acquire that responsibility??? ] to try to dissuade him or her from that decision and behavior that might result in harm to him/her and/or anyone else. And I think anyone who personally knows of someone who is unhinged and knows that that person is in possession of and carrying firearms probably would, for their own safety actually, take some action to removed the firearms from that person's possession.

This is a true story. When I lived in Pittsfield, Maine - sleepy little small town- peaceful - my back yard abutted the back yard of a couple who had two children and got divorced because Mom found out Dad was compulsively gambling. The little boy was the Mom's son by her first marriage, so only the little girl had weekend visits with the Dad - who was her biological father. Mom moved in with another guy. Dad took the little girl, drove over to the Mom's house, parked his car across her drive so she wouldn't be able to drive out to work the next morning and shot Georgeanne and himself. Mom came out to find them on her way to work the next morning. When my other neighbor came to tell me what had happened, she asked, 'Did you hear what John did?' When she told me, I thought she was talking about ANOTHER John, who also had a little girl and was divorced. I could have pictured that John doing it before I could picture this John doing it. At the time, I told my husband, 'If John had walked up to my door with a rifle in his hand, I'd have assumed he was going hunting and invited him in and offered him tea and cake before he left. If you've ever lived in Maine, you'd know, you see people all the time walking with guns over their shoulders and heading into the woods. Okay, so am I responsible for not making the connect before he killed himself and his daughter even though I had NO INFORMATION about what was really going on in this guy's head?

Where does the responsibility for the Aurora Movie Theater shootings begin?
This is a man who, six weeks before the shootings,
was adjudged by a psychiatrist to be in a semi-psychotic state.

Are you telling me that no one else in the gun owning community had any inkling of his unbalance?
No one to say "Hey, before he hurts himself or others, something must be done."

I don't know if anyone in the gun owning community had any inkling of his unbalance.

The frustrating and ultimately tragic aspect of this to me,
is that the people in the gun community and the people
in the psychiatric care community seem to have had no mechanism
to share the information that would have kept these dangerous
weapons out of this troubled, deluded, violent and mentally ill person's hands.

THAT'S where I think we are failing and need to make changes.
And whoever votes against ammending THAT failure and/lack needs
to feel at least a little complicit in putting others in danger.

But I don't know if these people on the porch would do that or not. I don't even know if they belong to the NRA. Maybe they're for banning assault weapons- I don't know enough about guns to recognize whether any of them is holding one (an assault rifle) or not.

So in your mind singing a white power political song is on par with the killing of humans on the scale of evil......interesting

I would argue that the current crop of gun owners are cowards about coming forward, personally or legally, to confront those who should not have guns in their possession.

the responsibility lies within the mental health community for failing to stop this wackaloon.

Quote:

Joe Nation wrote:
Where does the responsibility for the Aurora Movie Theater shootings begin?
This is a man who, six weeks before the shootings,
was adjudged by a psychiatrist to be in a semi-psychotic state.

Omsigdavid wrote:

Quote:

Is Colorado a semi-psychotic state ??

Who have you heard say that anyone has the right to use a gun to kill people-
(which is what a 'psycho' with a gun) would implicitely do?

David - put very simply:
I do not think it is wise to allow mentally ill people to access dangerous weapons,

just as yes, I DO think it is my responsibility
to try to intervene if I see someone who's drunk about to operate a vehicle.

That may not mean stealing his or her keys,
but it would mean alerting the authorities to impending danger
or disaster that I can see may unfold before my very eyes.

We differ on what we deem the extent of our personal responsibility as good citizens apparently.

But again, because I DO believe in personal responsibility,
I can not deem people who have never picked up a gun to hurt another
either purposefully or not purposefully, to be guilty or responsible for mass killings in the US.

Just as although I have a piano, I'm not guilty or responsible for those who mangle Chopin.

This is what happens when people are disarmed, Joe:

This has been a good conversation so far.

So far though, a total avoidance of making any connection
between what seems to me to be parts of the same set.

I'll say it again :
I would argue that the current crop of gun owners are cowards about coming forward,
personally or legally, to confront those who should not have guns in their possession.

the responsibility lies within the mental health community for failing to stop this wackaloon.

Interesting. The gun community supports the culture of open and free gun ownership for everybody,

then Whoops, it's not them that has any skin in the game when things go bad,
it's the tax-supported mental health folks not doing their job.

Maybe we should raise taxes on ammuntion sales
specifcially ear-marked for the local mental health clinic.

Or anytime there is a mass shooting, every gunowner for ten square miles
has to pay $100.00 per gun times the number of fatalities.

Maybe then, gun owners would start to pay attention to who the heck has lethal weapons.

Aidan (sorry for the previous mis-spelling) asked:

Who have you heard say that anyone has the right to use a gun to kill people-
(which is what a 'psycho' with a gun) would implicitely do?

You mean besides David?

I've known plenty of Americans who believe it's perfectly within anyone's rights to carry a semi-automatic pistol and use it lethally even in circumstances which, even to a slightly pudgy senior citizen like me, would find barely threatening.

When they do shoot someone, the gun community is either silent
or seeks to find some slim reason why the weapon needed to be used.

The gun community ought to be outraged that one of their members acted so irresponsibly.

They are not.
They are silent and I think it's through that silence
that the gun community as a whole licenses the mis-use,
the over-use, of guns as permissible.

I was going to say that they find such use regrettable,
but they don't ever even say that.

They could call 1-866-SPEAK-UP .
Did you know there's an anonymous hot-line to report gun threats?

Joe(neither did I)Nation