JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Great so it "sounds" like we have yet another of the zombies wandering around loose who should have been locked up. If this is really all true next will be of course him being "not guilty" because he was not all there. So before long they will turn him loose on the public again. Meanwhile what we really need is yet another "gun law" because that will of course fix this. 🤬
 
I note that perp and victim are both 38. High school buds, maybe?

Point: Friend knew that he was spiraling out of control and had a gun. Couldn't afford the free 911 call? These nutjobs ALWAYS give many warnings that something big is coming. To ignore it is the tragedy.
 
I note that perp and victim are both 38. High school buds, maybe?

Point: Friend knew that he was spiraling out of control and had a gun. Couldn't afford the free 911 call? These nutjobs ALWAYS give many warnings that something big is coming. To ignore it is the tragedy.
That was the part that really bothered me here too. So often when some kook goes off we read this. That the kook was making it very clear for a while that they were well a kook. Then no one does anything until its too late. If this is really how this went down I would bet money the guy was taking medications for a good while and had stopped taking them too. Sadly too bad no one there could just drop him with their gun before he could shoot a second person. Now we get to support him for a long time and he will probably be turned loose on the public again. :mad:
 
President Trump made some very true (and quickly dismissed by the media) remarks about violence, specifically involving firearms: "It's a mental health issue". Pretty clear here.

I wonder how many provisions in the so-called "infrastructure" bill are for mental health facilities?

Unless it is for re-education camps.
It's a moving target because of all the kabuki theater trying to get it passed but as of Nov 10,2021 . . .

$165 million for mental health and substance use disorder (SUD) services, including:

  • $75 million for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline
  • $50 million for the Minority Fellowship Program at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
  • $25 million for SAMHSA's Recovery Community Services Program Statewide Network program
  • $15 million for Project Aware
  • $5 million for the National Child Traumatic Stress Network
 
It's a moving target because of all the kabuki theater trying to get it passed but as of Nov 10,2021 . . .

$165 million for mental health and substance use disorder (SUD) services, including:

  • $75 million for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline
  • $50 million for the Minority Fellowship Program at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
  • $25 million for SAMHSA's Recovery Community Services Program Statewide Network program
  • $15 million for Project Aware
  • $5 million for the National Child Traumatic Stress Network
0.6% of the bill. Six tenths of one percent. As society crumbles - never mind the bridges!
At least (so far) 0 dollars for Republican re-education camps.
 
I note that perp and victim are both 38. High school buds, maybe?

Point: Friend knew that he was spiraling out of control and had a gun. Couldn't afford the free 911 call? These nutjobs ALWAYS give many warnings that something big is coming. To ignore it is the tragedy.
Yes but then we are going down a very slippery slope, a slope that will lead to even greater and more draconian "red flag" type situations.
I agree what happened is horrible but we have to look past what has happened and also look into the future about how our actions will affect our rights, the last thing we want to do is give the Libs more of an excuse to create more laws and those laws coming to fruition because of us. Although we mean well in trying to bring forward the idea that someone needs help; at the same time we don't want to give ammo to our ideological opponents .
 
Yes but then we are going down a very slippery slope, a slope that will lead to even greater and more draconian "red flag" type situations.
I agree what happened is horrible but we have to look past what has happened and also look into the future about how our actions will affect our rights, the last thing we want to do is give the Libs more of an excuse to create more laws and those laws coming to fruition because of us. Although we mean well in trying to bring forward the idea that someone needs help; at the same time we don't want to give ammo to our ideological opponents .
I am NOT big on the "red flag laws" so to speak but, so often when this happens we find out later it was really bad. Several of the school shooting were a prime example. Some kook, who a LOT of people seemed to know was a kook, finally goes off. If this guy really was showing clear signs of going off the deep end he should have been dealt with. Every time one of them does this it just feeds the public willing to go along with "do something laws". Of course it also does not help that long term scum, who are not kooks, just scum, are treated to a revolving door at the jail. :mad:
 
Yes but then we are going down a very slippery slope, a slope that will lead to even greater and more draconian "red flag" type situations.
I agree what happened is horrible but we have to look past what has happened and also look into the future about how our actions will affect our rights, the last thing we want to do is give the Libs more of an excuse to create more laws and those laws coming to fruition because of us. Although we mean well in trying to bring forward the idea that someone needs help; at the same time we don't want to give ammo to our ideological opponents .
Dude WAS a red flag. No one cares. I was not actually suggesting more laws at all. We have way too many. Sorry for the confusion. My point was that every such tragedy could have been prevented if only one person of the many who were suspicious had called about the perp. Probably already a felon in possession, this guy was known to the PD and probably not for good reasons.
 
A Red Flag will only take the guns they know about or can find and prevent a legal purchase.

This is NO Mental Health follow up unless the suspect wants to petition the court to get his guns back.
 
Although we mean well in trying to bring forward the idea that someone needs help; at the same time we don't want to give ammo to our ideological opponents .
Ok let's take guns OUT of the equation.

What if a person is showing signs of extreme psychological issues (for whatever reasons) such as substance abuse, threats to others, injury to him/herself etc. BUT with NO laws actually broken, and NO GUNS ARE INVOLVED - are we (as friends, family whatever) going to just shut up, look the other way and let it pass?

Now put guns back into the equation with the same scenario. DO we intentionally OVERLOOK the same problems the person is displaying because they are possibly still legal gun owners, who have NOT yet harmed anyone (but displaying the potential to do so) BUT because no laws have been broken (yet) do we stay silent because 'we don't want to give ammo to our ideological opponents?'

I am hardly in support of 'red flag' laws. What I do support is the proactive actions of anyone who sees someone as a potential threat to him/herself, (or possibly to others) and does NOT use gun ownership as a 'dividing line' between doing what MIGHT be the right thing to do - or doing nothing because of a 'right' the person may have.
 
Ok let's take guns OUT of the equation.

What if a person is showing signs of extreme psychological issues (for whatever reasons) such as substance abuse, threats to others, injury to him/herself etc. BUT with NO laws actually broken, and NO GUNS ARE INVOLVED - are we (as friends, family whatever) going to just shut up, look the other way and let it pass?

Now put guns back into the equation with the same scenario. DO we intentionally OVERLOOK the same problems the person is displaying because they are possibly still legal gun owners, who have NOT yet harmed anyone (but displaying the potential to do so) BUT because no laws have been broken (yet) do we stay silent because 'we don't want to give ammo to our ideological opponents?'

I am hardly in support of 'red flag' laws. What I do support is the proactive actions of anyone who sees someone as a potential threat to him/herself, (or possibly to others) and does NOT use gun ownership as a 'dividing line' between doing what MIGHT be the right thing to do - or doing nothing because of a 'right' the person may have.
I agree for the most part; sadly, the anti's won't want to give us a chance to do the right thing without them taking advantage of it... :(
 
Ok let's take guns OUT of the equation.

What if a person is showing signs of extreme psychological issues (for whatever reasons) such as substance abuse, threats to others, injury to him/herself etc. BUT with NO laws actually broken, and NO GUNS ARE INVOLVED - are we (as friends, family whatever) going to just shut up, look the other way and let it pass?

Now put guns back into the equation with the same scenario. DO we intentionally OVERLOOK the same problems the person is displaying because they are possibly still legal gun owners, who have NOT yet harmed anyone (but displaying the potential to do so) BUT because no laws have been broken (yet) do we stay silent because 'we don't want to give ammo to our ideological opponents?'

I am hardly in support of 'red flag' laws. What I do support is the proactive actions of anyone who sees someone as a potential threat to him/herself, (or possibly to others) and does NOT use gun ownership as a 'dividing line' between doing what MIGHT be the right thing to do - or doing nothing because of a 'right' the person may have.
Thank you!

If a person needs help, help them. If a person is a threat, and you truly trust the City or State not to do them more harm than good, ask for their help in committing them. BUT, we have to be very, very careful about who decides who's crazy and who's not. We've seen what happens when we have appointed and self-appointed arbiters of truth. So how do we create a system that is extremely difficult to corrupt or abuse? You're giving people the power to destroy lives. Some of the folks drawn to that power should never be near it. This is the part of the equation that has to be handled first, before firearms can even enter into the discussion.
 
This is the part of the equation that has to be handled first, before firearms can even enter into the discussion.
And this was the basis for my response.

Guns should in NO way more be any more of an element of the discussion than say vehicles, knives, dangerous chemicals, baseball bats, hammers etc. with regard to a person who is displaying 'questionable' behavior.
 
A gunman shot an Instacart worker after a brief exchange in a Fred Meyer supermarket and fired at the victim as he lay dying on the floor of the store where he had been caught shoplifting just days earlier,
So here we go. A murder by a shoplifter who was 'caught shoplifting just days earlier' - and set free.

Stay vigilant my friends - murderous criminals now walk free among us....

We are in a new, ugly world where a large part of crime is being overlooked, and now 'shoplifters' (once nothing but simpletons stealing basic stuff) are now becoming murderers?
 
Last Edited:
I was kind of afraid stuff like this was going to start to come out :(
Tensions are running high. Lock people down for two years and they get a little crazy. Then as they start to learn that there was no good reason for it other than money, and discover how many people were deliberately killed, more of them are going to lose their bubblegum. Hopefully it doesn't go past random whackos going nuts here and there.
 

Upcoming Events

Centralia Gun Show
Centralia, WA
Klamath Falls gun show
Klamath Falls, OR
Oregon Arms Collectors April 2024 Gun Show
Portland, OR
Albany Gun Show
Albany, OR

New Resource Reviews

Back Top