What can the "gun culture" do?

[MrAnderson]

Michael:

I wonder if you've thought about what the "gun culture", aka gun owners, can do about this mounting problem of "active killers?"  To date, I kind of feel like we've stuck our head in the ground and just tried to convince everyone else to do the same.  I don't want to lose my right to own and shoot firearms, but if we leave it to the anti-gun people to propose solutions that may be the end result!

We continue to see a rise in the number of active killers (especially, in no-gun zones!) and there is no reason to think it will do anything but increase.  Instead, why don't we (i.e., NRA, SAF, GOA, NSSF, etc.) propose a solution that will satisfy law-abiding citizens?  I mean, if anyone can come up with an idea that will make it more difficult for active killers to commit their crimes, it should be the gun people!!

Thanks,
Dave

P.S.  I do not like the term "active shooter" used to refer to killers, since I am an "active" shooter, meaning, I shoot a lot, not kill a lot!

[bbbean]

Why do you think this is a "mounting problem" or that the number of these attacks is rising? Do ou have any numbers to support that conclusion?

[mkm]

I'll let the original poster or some other willing person find numbers; however, I will give you my take on why they are (or seem to be) a "mounting problem" and increasing in numbers.

With the internet, cell phones with video, and today's media, information is instantly available to everyone.  More times than not, it's not verified but just passed on as truth for hours or days.  I can't speak for the numbers, but a shooting can happen right now and it'll be on the internet and tv within minutes.  Before, news traveled much slower and coverage was limited to the local region or truly national topics.  Now, the most trivial of news that originates in Backwoods, MS is just as available there as it is to residents of Podunk, Washington and Am-I-in-Canada-Yet, ME (I mean not harm with any of the names).

Add into that the generally polarizing topic of guns, and it makes headlines.  So, whether or not they are increasing is debateable, but the fact that more people are getting knowledge of them occurring is hard to argue.  This is especially true when anti-gun organizations make sure they are spread around the country.

I think the original poster is just trying to start a reasonable push to distance crazy lone gunmen from the vast majority of law-abiding, responsible gun owners who just want to maintain their Consitutional right to own guns for self-defence, hunting, and other gun-sports, or just for the sake of legally owning a gun.  I think he's also looking for suggestions or finding ways to prevent shootings without infringing on the rights of everyone else.

[tombogan03884]

When the citizens of Northfield Minn. found themselves in a similar situation they gunned up and shot the hell out of the James/Younger gang.
On the other hand, it was a small town where all the locals knew each other by sight.
With today's larger, more mobile population the difficulty of knowing who is the bad guy and who is another CCW would make that a recipe for disaster in most larger towns.
The best bet would be to simply concentrate on getting you and yours out of the kill zone as rapidly and safely as possible.

[WatchManUSA]

Michael:

I wonder if you've thought about what the "gun culture", aka gun owners, can do about this mounting problem of "active killers?"  To date, I kind of feel like we've stuck our head in the ground and just tried to convince everyone else to do the same.  I don't want to lose my right to own and shoot firearms, but if we leave it to the anti-gun people to propose solutions that may be the end result!

We continue to see a rise in the number of active killers (especially, in no-gun zones!) and there is no reason to think it will do anything but increase.  Instead, why don't we (i.e., NRA, SAF, GOA, NSSF, etc.) propose a solution that will satisfy law-abiding citizens?  I mean, if anyone can come up with an idea that will make it more difficult for active killers to commit their crimes, it should be the gun people!!

Thanks,
Dave

P.S.  I do not like the term "active shooter" used to refer to killers, since I am an "active" shooter, meaning, I shoot a lot, not kill a lot!

Your post leads me to believe you are suggesting some type of proactive program that can impact already defined unlawful behavior.

The first thing to realize is it is impossible to create a law, rule or regulation that will prevent 100% of any behavior.  Murder has not been acceptable behavior for millennia yet it still happens.

I don’t know if you believe in God, but scripture demonstrates that we humans have free will.  Each individual has the ability to choose our behavior.  We use our morals and ethics as filters to help us decide how we will act.  Then you throw in mental illness and personality defects and things start to get even more complicated.

You may as well ask us to come up with a plan to change the basic characteristics of human behavior.  On that I’m sure the left would not like nor accept our suggestions.

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

Mr. Anderson usually posts well thought out  questions and ideas.
While I tend agree with MKM that it is not so much a rise in incidents as it is wider dissemination of reports, I am approaching the OP as primarily summed up by the title.
What can we in the gun culture do either re-actively or proactively other than commiserating with the victims , and regretting that such incidents occur ?

I really don't think there is much we can do. The most important step is enforcing laws already on the books, here are 2 examples I ran across in the past week

http://finance.boston.com/boston/news/read?GUID=16858245

Arizona Aftermath: More Than Thirty States Have Failed to Enact Laws Requiring Mental Health Records to Be Submitted to the National Gun Background Check Database
Friday January 28, 2011 - 12:41 PM EST
PRNewsWire News Releases
Released By Mayors Against Illegal Guns
Share:
Bookmark and Share
Text Size:
 
 

Only 17 states have submitted more than 1,000 mental health records to database, and more than 1.5 million records are estimated to be missing

New state laws enacted to improve submission of records to National Instant Background Check System (NICS) in the wake of the Virginia Tech massacre appear to be working

WASHINGTON, Jan. 28, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is being issued by Mayors Against Illegal Guns:

In December 2005, Seung-Hui Cho was found to present "an imminent danger to himself as a result of mental illness" by a special judge.  This should have barred him from owning a gun under federal law, 18 U.S.C. section 922(g)(4), but, because his mental health records were never sent to the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System ("NICS"), in March 2007 Cho was able to purchase the guns he used the following month to shoot and kill 32 people at Virginia Tech.  Similarly, the Tucson shooter, Jared Loughner, should have been barred from purchasing his shotgun less than a year after he was rejected from enlisting in the army due to drug abuse, but his record was not forwarded to NICS. 

The tragedy at Virginia Tech brought attention to the failure of our national gun background check database to identify people with mental health issues that should prohibit them from purchasing guns.  At the time of the shooting, there were only around 300,000 records in the NICS Index "Mental Defective" file, even though the United States General Accounting Office estimates that the file should contain around 2.7 million records. 

There are several reasons that states were not sending mental health records to NICS.  Some states had not provided their agencies with the authority to share mental health records with the federal government.  In other states, state privacy laws barred the sharing of such records.  In still others, the right laws were in place but state agencies lacked the resources or initiative to share the records.

More at link, as you read through note that States most likely to suffer mass shooting incidents, Il, NY  NJ are amung the least likely to report mental illness to the NICS system.
(Yeah, I know, this comes from Bloomberg, but I can't find the story I originally saw and this does list the non complying states. It was the best I could find on short notice )


Then there is the other problem, I posted this earlier in the week.

http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=15617.0

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1317386&srvc=rss

In the wake of the assault arrest of a seven-time lifer out on parole, the new head of the state Parole Board yesterday said the board is reviewing the casework of all the state’s paroled lifers to see if more supervision is required.

“Our primary objective with the policy is to create a level of enhanced supervision for certain parolees to ensure those who (are) at a higher risk are receiving the maximum amount of supervision,” said Chairman Josh Wall.

Word of the review comes after a convicted killer — paroled in 2007 while serving seven life sentences — was arrested for allegedly dragging his girlfriend from his car and threatening to “put a bullet in her head” on Valentine’s Day.

Charles Doucette Jr., 51, of Beverly was nabbed late Monday evening and charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, threat to kill, and witness intimidation.

Doucette told cops his girlfriend hit him and he pushed her away from the car and then drove off.

He was held without bail following his arraignment Tuesday in Salem District Court.

Wall said the board is working on revoking Doucette’s parole, which would send him back to prison for the rest of his life. Parolees can be sent back to prison for a number of non-criminal violations, including the use of alcohol and drugs, Wall noted.

According to a letter sent to the Parole Board by Essex District Attorney Jonathan W. Blodgett in 2006, Doucette was sentenced to seven concurrent life sentences for second-degree murder, home invasion and a variety of other offenses committed while he was out on bail for the 1991 murder. Doucette served 15 years and was paroled in February 2007.

Suzanne Maynard, the sister of Ray Bufalinos who was shot to death execution-style by Doucette, said she was one of nine whose testimony failed to sway the board that year.

“He’s a menace to society. I hate his guts, I can’t help it,” Maynard said. “He’s a vicious, violent person who never should have gotten out. I don’t get it. I don’t get our system.”

The year after his parole, Doucette was charged with raping a woman and was ordered held on $300,000 bail in Haverhill District Court, but a grand jury found there was not enough evidence to indict him, the Essex DA’s office said.
ojohnson@bostonherald.com

As long as States can't or won't enforce their current laws or keep convicted violent offenders in their cages, I do not see any thing that the rest of us can do other than publicly placing the blame where it belongs.

[MrAnderson]

Thanks, Tom.  Yes, that was my point.  I agree with WatchMan that we can't stop criminals from using guns with more laws.  It's already illegal!  But, ignoring what is happening is not going to help.

And, I don't think it is an increase in reporting.  Most mass killings have occurred in the last decade, and we had the internet during that entire time!  I think, instead, it is probably a copycat phenomenon - the more it is publicized, the more sick individuals consider and plan such attacks.  BTW, I'm not talking about unverified reports, I'm talking about every single report that has turned out true!

Again, the shakers and movers of the shooting industry would do well to propose steps to address some aspect of this problem.

Regards

[tombogan03884]

The NRA has long been pushing their " Project exile" that worked so well in Richmond at getting career violent criminals off the street.
In the case of crazy people, even if States were keeping up with reporting them to the NICS system there is absolutely nothing you can legally do under the US Constitution until they actually commit a crime.
Preventive detention is what the NAZI's used to put people in Concentration Camps, do you REALLY want to set that precedent in the US ?
The only practical measures available to members of the "Gun culture" under the Constitution are the basic rules of self defense, be armed, be aware, and if something bad starts get you and yours out of the area.

[WatchManUSA]

I'm all for the Project Exile enforcement.  All too many laws are not enforced. 

I'm not confident the "shooting industry" could come up with any meaningful solutions.  I would expect their solution to be to something akin to limiting magazine capacity.

[DGF]

In the District of Columbia, notable for their distaste for firearms of any kind, there is a law that requires automatic sentencing for using a firearm in the commission of a crime. I believe the sentence is 5 years tacked on to whatever else you are convicted of. It is a law that almost never used. They hate to put the poor dears in prison.

Last year a policeman was killed when he was struck and killed by a young felon fleeing the scene of a crime. This same young felon was, six months earlier, given a pass on an illegal gun charge. Had he been in prison where he belonged, that LEO would still be alive.