I can not think of a reasonable gun law that would have stopped this, except perhaps a law saying that no one can own a gun if they have a mentally ill person in their home.
This lady was apparently now, we learn, a collector. Even if not, by what process can an outside authority OBJECTIVELY identify someone mentally ill and then ban weapons there? How would this ever be constitutional?
The 'mentally ill' person is the one who has to be removed. That is why the critical piece is an objective test.
It is the mental health piece which must be rendered into a medical diagnosis of unassailable finality.
What a piece of magnificent legacy THIS could be for Barack Obama! Can you imagine how he would be remembered? If he is not thinking this in terms of benevolent self interest he is a stupid person. He is not a stupid person.
Financing the research which gives birth to the identification and repair (next step IF POSSIBLE) of such people, not by some Stalinesque quotient of answers to questions made up by a bunch of social workers and psychologists, but instead by something we can measure directly.
We have ended polio. We have ended an unimaginable stream of deadly diseases, and are tackling the end of cancer by GENETIC manipulation of the tumors, and protein shaping of anti cancer items.
What is stopping us from doing this but the desire and determination to DO IT?
I just cannot accept that this is impossible to do. Everything in me that has ever worked on science is screaming this to me.
Someplace out there is the Jonas Salk of this disease state.
I believe you are correct about that. Eventually we will be able to genetically manipulate people in order to banish such problems.
I do think we are decades off from such genetic manipulation, however.
Epa, you should read Ray Kurzweil's "The Age of Spiritual Macines" and "The Singularity is Near."
Sunday, December 16, 2012 4:27:00 pm
1) The problem is that the govt is UNFIT to decide on screening.
2) LOCAL BOARDS OF EDUC DO NOT HAVE TO BE ..but remember I speak from a town of 2000 people, and if people are pissed off, they call the supervisors, the board of educ, and town mgr and treasurers ON THEIR CELL PHONES.
3) We cannot do nothing, unless doing something creates more harm, and that's a hard one to argue. With three incidents in a year, there is cause to seriously wonder WHAT PROCESS IS GOING ON? Debate on this is now, IMHO, compulsory.
4) Acquiring guns ... what local laws exist for securing weapons? Of what use is a locked cabinet if the key is available when the owner is murdered by a deranged sicko? Do we need hand print locks? Or would this only instigate the perp to cutoff the hand of the first victim? A discussion on why owning semi auto version of the M-4 is Constitutional IS COMING. There is only one answer to that, and it's because it's a defense by the citizens FROM THE GOVT. Will that sell? ASK YOURSELVES. I am asking as an OBSERVER.
There is also no argument that one armed and trained adult SOMEWHERE in that school could have saved lives. We have Marshalls on flights for a reason.
5) We need to be asking ourselves about SOLUTIONS. The time has come to ask ourselves to COME UP WITH A PLAN TO SOLVE, TO BEGIN TO SOLVE. To do the research to solve. TO think of various ways we can OBJECTIVELY measure this tendency.
For instance,....the answer may NOT be a psychological one, but a brain chemistry, brain structure and brain genetic one. Anyone looked? How? When?
One of my early jobs was selling Brain Mapping Equipment. One of the tests done with this equipment was called a P300 test. Visual and or aural stimuli were given and then the brain generates an involuntary response 300 ms later. KGB used this, BTW. I participated in providing and aiding in the technical use of this equip at an upstate NY prison where multiple to mass murderers were kept. And I can TELL YOU their P300's were not the same as the general population.
Meaningful? Maybe. But in what way? That is an anecdote not research.
We cannot do nothing, and it is our PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY as Americans not to demand a solution but to pro actively LOOK and THINK and then ask WHY ISN'T THIS BEING DONE? WHY ISN'T THAT BEING DONE? If the answer is, 'well that won't work' then we have to keep thinking until we find the answer.
This is the most important component of the solution. An OBJECTIVE means of identification as reliable as the gene marker for the aggressive and fatal breast cancer, or family history and blood and stress testing for cardiovascular disease. An answer as effective as Lipitor and Plavix. And by the way... the laws today in several states support the court enforcing medications being administered forcibly if the individual will not cooperate. This being done as a result of psychologists is not really acceptable, but an OBJECTIVE TEST?
No armed guards will solve a sicko shooting the guard first and then killing kids.
No locked door can keep out an armed (with explosives, even home made) from gaining entrance and acting before the cops arrive.
No panic room in every classroom will avert the tragedy of the first causalities.
We can't just shrug our shoulders and think, 'oh well, Newtown got hit by lightning'
3 incidents in a year is meaningful. If we had 3 Ebola outbreak in a year would we all be wondering WTF?
What's the difference?
Maybe nothing can be done, but if this is the answer it had better be the result of an exhaustive, leave no idea untested process that took decades to delineate
3 Comments
Close this window Jump to comment formI can not think of a reasonable gun law that would have stopped this, except perhaps a law saying that no one can own a gun if they have a mentally ill person in their home.
But, is that a reasonable gun law?
I'm not too sure about that.
Sunday, December 16, 2012 2:39:00 pm
This lady was apparently now, we learn, a collector.
Even if not, by what process can an outside authority OBJECTIVELY identify someone mentally ill and then ban weapons there?
How would this ever be constitutional?
The 'mentally ill' person is the one who has to be removed. That is why the critical piece is an objective test.
It is the mental health piece which must be rendered into a medical diagnosis of unassailable finality.
What a piece of magnificent legacy THIS could be for Barack Obama! Can you imagine how he would be remembered? If he is not thinking this in terms of benevolent self interest he is a stupid person. He is not a stupid person.
Financing the research which gives birth to the identification and repair (next step IF POSSIBLE) of such people, not by some Stalinesque quotient of answers to questions made up by a bunch of social workers and psychologists, but instead by something we can measure directly.
We have ended polio. We have ended an unimaginable stream of deadly diseases, and are tackling the end of cancer by GENETIC manipulation of the tumors, and protein shaping of anti cancer items.
What is stopping us from doing this but the desire and determination to DO IT?
I just cannot accept that this is impossible to do. Everything in me that has ever worked on science is screaming this to me.
Someplace out there is the Jonas Salk of this disease state.
Sunday, December 16, 2012 3:26:00 pm
I believe you are correct about that. Eventually we will be able to genetically manipulate people in order to banish such problems.
I do think we are decades off from such genetic manipulation, however.
Epa, you should read Ray Kurzweil's "The Age of Spiritual Macines" and "The Singularity is Near."
Sunday, December 16, 2012 4:27:00 pm