Jared Loughner is just "a lone nut"?

[Krimson X]

Originally Posted by Krimson X

Now Palin has weighed in with an 8 minute speech via Facebook in which she is quoted as saying that liberals and media pundits are "manufacturing a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn." I know she did not write that speech, but does she even know what blood libel is? I have to admit that I didn't until this morning, but come on Mama Grizzly! If you make statements like that, understand first what you are saying.

Blood libel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And if Rep. Gabrielle Giffords is Jewish as reported, Sara has some explaining to do for her apparent anti-semitic statement. Talk about hatred and violence.

UPDATE: Simon Greer, president of Jewish Funds for Justice released the following statement today:

We are deeply disturbed by Fox News commentator Sarah Palin's decision to characterize as a "blood libel" the criticism directed at her following the terrorist attack in Tucson. The term "blood libel" is not a synonym for "false accusation." It refers to a specific falsehood perpetuated by Christians about Jews for centuries, a falsehood that motivated a good deal of anti-Jewish violence and discrimination. Unless someone has been accusing Ms. Palin of killing Christian babies and making matzoh from their blood, her use of the term is totally out-of-line.

In the past two months, Ms. Palin and Glenn Beck, the most well-known media personalities on Fox News, have abused two of the most tragic episode in the history of the Jewish people: the Holocaust and the blood libel. In addition, Roger Ailes, the head of the Fox News channel, referred to the executives at NPR as "Nazis." Perhaps the popular news channel has such an ingrained victim mentality that it identifies with one of the most persecuted minorities in human history. But the Jewish community does not appreciate their identification, which only serves to denigrate the very real pain so many Jews have suffered because of anti-Semitic violence. It is clear that Fox News has a Jewish problem.

Sarah Palin did not shoot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Only the perpetrator can be found guilty for this act of terrorism. But it is worth pointing out that it was Rep. Giffords herself who first objected to Ms. Palin's map showing her district in the crosshairs. "We're on Sarah Palin's targeted list, but the thing is, the way she has it depicted, it has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. When people do that they have to realize that there are consequences to that action." According to Ms. Palin's logic, Rep. Giffords statement was a blood libel against the Fox News host. The fact that Rep. Giffords is Jewish and Ms. Palin is Christian makes the accusation even more grotesque.

Ms. Palin clearly took some time to reflect before putting out her statement today. Despite that time, her primary conclusion was that she is the victim and Rep. Giffords is the perpetrator. As a powerful rhetorical advocate for personal responsibility, Ms. Palin has failed to live up to her own standards with this statement.

[PersonaNonGrata]

Originally Posted by Viperfreak2

Scenario: I am being stabbed with a knife. You and your family are nearby and see it happen. What do you do? One dead, everyone else puts a good distance away.

I would dispute that it was never documented because so many people have already come out and said they were afraid of him in a school. I hope someone went to the front office and they documented the fears.

Is the stabber done after killing you or is he on a rampage? If he's done with just you then I'll be a good witness and call 911. If he's still actively attacking people I would likely do what I could to stop him, provided anyone with me is safe. I have the means to intervene with lethal force if necessary. It is not my first choice of actions but if lives are at stake and I can deploy my firearm then that is certainly an option, and an option where a gun can save lives.

I agree that Loughner has a long history of people observing bizarre and scary behavior. Some were probably reported to someone. The problem is what happens with those reports? If a school employee or administrator is told by a student that another student is acting bizarre and even making threatening statements, what does that person do with it? Who do they report it to? What is done with the person reported? Can the person be committed based on that? You see where I'm coming from on this? That is the issue, not the guns.

The question about how someone with a mental health history can get a gun will no doubt be discussed. I think that is where we need to look for answers and solutions. It's part of a larger issue in society. How do we deal with people who are mentally ill?

[Viperfreak2]

From what I know about local schools today (two of my family members are teachers), they take reports of odd behavior seriously and document it. Most of the time the police are not notified unless something severe happens. Then the whole history is communicated to them.

I am sure that with all the statements made about him so far (one guy said on the NBC news that he looked over his shoulder when he was at the dry-erase board to keep an eye on Loughner, others say the knew he was gonna show up one day with a weapon and take everyone out) his schools had to notify the police at one time or another.

It's not always clear who is 'mentally ill' and who is gonna snap because they just got fired. In so many other cases, people say they were clueless about a shooter until after the damage was done.

[Dannyell]

Crazy or not, if he would have wanted to get a gun he could have done so...

Do you think we will judge whether someone should carry a gun based on what they did at school? ...it will never happen...too many factors to take into consideration....and the crazies will still find ways to get guns and kill people.

Unfortunately this is the society we live in.

[PersonaNonGrata]

Originally Posted by Viperfreak2

From what I know about local schools today (two of my family members are teachers), they take reports of odd behavior seriously and document it. Most of the time the police are not notified unless something severe happens. Then the whole history is communicated to them.

I am sure that with all the statements made about him so far (one guy said on the NBC news that he looked over his shoulder when he was at the dry-erase board to keep an eye on Loughner, others say the knew he was gonna show up one day with a weapon and take everyone out) his schools had to notify the police at one time or another.

It's not always clear who is 'mentally ill' and who is gonna snap because they just got fired. In so many other cases, people say they were clueless about a shooter until after the damage was done.

I believe that people did notice things and report them but the question becomes what is done with that information? Does a school just file it away? Do they report it? To who? Is there a repository of information on people who have exhibited bizarre behavior? Even though the school had documented incidences about this guy it is only useful as a retrospective. "Oh yes, I remember him. Here's his file of crazy behavior." What can be done with such information to prevent future behavior? How can dangerousness be predicted with enough surety to take somebody out of society? How does a bunch of entries in a school or business' records intergrate with government records for things like getting a gun or getting a license to be a foster parent or whatever?

That is what I'm talking about. Plenty of people will come out of the woodwork and talk about how they knew the guy was odd, was a loner, ranted about bizarre things but what good does that do after the fact? If so many people knew Loughner was mentally unstable, why wasn't anything done? What could have been done? If something could have been done and was done then perhaps he would have been unable to carry out his mass killing.

Originally Posted by Dannyell

Crazy or not, if he would have wanted to get a gun he could have done so...

Do you think we will judge whether someone should carry a gun based on what they did at school? ...it will never happen...too many factors to take into consideration....and the crazies will still find ways to get guns and kill people.

Unfortunately this is the society we live in.

True. Crazies and people intent on carrying out terror will do whatever they need to in order to accomplish their goal. If he couldn't get a gun then he could have easily driven a car through the crowd (a al Santa Monica Farmer's Market case) and killed even more people. They were in front of a grocery store and vulnerable to an attack with a vehicle.

[Weasel]

I'd be willing to bet a very minuscule percentage of guns used in crimes, especially crimes of this nature are not obtained in any sort of legal fashion..... Most guns used in violent crimes are stolen or obtained on the streets. Where did he get the glock he used?

I also heard (but forgot the details) that his dad is either a cop or in politics to the extent of him not getting in the trouble he should have in his past. A case of family in high enough places to get him out of a lot of stuff most would be processed for, whether by law or psychiatric evaluation.

[PersonaNonGrata]

Originally Posted by Weasel

I'd be willing to bet a very minuscule percentage of guns used in crimes, especially crimes of this nature are not obtained in any sort of legal fashion..... Most guns used in violent crimes are stolen or obtained on the streets. Where did he get the glock he used?

I also heard (but forgot the details) that his dad is either a cop or in politics to the extent of him not getting in the trouble he should have in his past. A case of family in high enough places to get him out of a lot of stuff most would be processed for, whether by law or psychiatric evaluation.

He bought the gun legally at a sporting goods store in town. Don't know about the father's position.

Again, tons of people said he was nuts but that meant nothing as there was nothing that could be done about it. If he had committed a serious enough crime prior to the shooting there might have been a chance some mental health intervention could have taken place. If that had happened, it is unlikely he would have been able to buy the gun.

[Viperfreak2]

Originally Posted by Dannyell

Crazy or not, if he would have wanted to get a gun he could have done so...

Do you think we will judge whether someone should carry a gun based on what they did at school? ...it will never happen...too many factors to take into consideration....and the crazies will still find ways to get guns and kill people.

Unfortunately this is the society we live in.

We should always keep working to better the society we live in, not just say 'this is it, nothing we can do'

The point I didn't make clear enough was a school hearing about threats. Any reported threats should have been documented and the police contacted. Then, the way it should work, is that he is in a database to not legally sell him guns. He shows up at a sporting goods store to buy a gun, they look in the computer and they tell him no. Would that stop him from getting a gun? No way, but it makes it more difficult, and the choice of gun (and magazine) less. Some 'street' dealers will sell to anyone. Some would see the crazy in his eyes and consider that he might shoot them in the back after the deal.

Anyway, once the police were involved maybe there could have been more push to get him some medical help. His parents should have been first in line asking for it. Did they?

[Krimson X]

Rush might want to take this Tucson area billboard down.

[Dannyell]

Originally Posted by Viperfreak2

We should always keep working to better the society we live in, not just say 'this is it, nothing we can do'

I get what you are saying ... but look at the world we live in... this incident like others before have sparked a bunch of debates and thats it. Even if laws change here and there it won't be enough to end these kind of tragic events.

Any action the government takes one way or another one group of people is bound to disagree...and there are 'crazies' in every little circle capable of pulling off all kinds of stunts.

I wonder how many people ran out to buy larger magazines because they heard on the news that soon they might not be able to...

People seem to never learn to be more alert unless something like this happens, and that is quite unfortunate.