Here's a decent article that goes into why Card's guns weren't taken from him after it became clear to many people that he was psychiatrically unstable and dangerous. Long story short: the laws were in place, but people didn't act on them.
the laws were in place, but people didn’t act on them.
That means the families of the dead can sue the law enforcement and state.
Yay more tax dollars spent!
And if you act now, we'll throw in a free bonus of 'NO ACCOUNTABILITY'
At what point can authorities be held criminally liable for failing to enforce laws that protect people, and as a direct result someone gets killed? We need to be better about holding our institutions accountable.
That’s a good question, but I don’t really know the answer. Someone else ITT mentioned the possibility of civil action against the people/institutions that should have acted. I don’t know if any other legal action is possible.
Needs to be taken as serious as a heart attack.
If you have chest pains at work, they call an ambulance right away. If you're at work and you talk about violent urges you have with your guns, it needs to be treated as if you're having a heart attack, as if it's a matter of life and death.
I know it's important to get answers to these questions, and I know that there's a chance something could be learned that might lower the chance of someone losing their mind and hurting other people or themselves. I know that this is the right thing to do and I agree that they should be using the brain to help people.
But on a more visceral level, I recoil at the thought of any good coming from a mass shooting, especially from the shooter.
Invoking "the good side" of a mass shooting just feels wrong.
And again, I don't disagree with it, but what are the odds that any action will be taken if they do find a link?
Why can no good come out of something bad? You should always learn from your mistakes.
It's easier just to remain a victim than admit you're a part of the society that has failed so fundamentally to its core.
It gives me the ick as well, but I feel that there is always a silver lining to be found even in the worst of circumstances. There's always something to be learned... still I wish that none of this happened at all. It's sickening, to be sure
Could happen to anyone. Shouldn't have let him get the guns in the first place, knowing this could happen.
Gun owners are law abiding citizens.
Until they’re not. But that not the guns fault. And we shouldn’t do anything about people’s access to guns.
Go back to 1.
They banned lawn darts when I was a kid based on the potential for harm.
The only reason he's not committing a crime before he starts shooting people is because the gun is legal. You are bootstrapping. You could just as easily outlaw the gun and it would be contraband, and then he would be committing a crime prior to going on a mass murder spree.
What I'm suggesting is that humans are simply too frail and prone to decompensation and loss of control to let people have whatever weapons of war they want.
If I had a magic wand I would come up with a formula for lethality that measures stopping power over sustained fire for maybe a minute or two, taking into account the time it takes to reload or change magazines.
I'm all for self-defense. I could even buy into an interpretation of the Constitution and of natural law for that matter. That gives everyone a right to possess self-defense weapons. If you can't do the job of self-defense with five or six shots, you got a problem that no gun will solve. Why should society bear the burden and risk of giving you those guns anyway? The risks outweigh the benefits.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.