Kansas Crimson

For a guy who already underwent a psychiatric evaluation as a result of violent threats previously, why wasn’t he red flagged?

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:07 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 8:16 am

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 4:59 pm Dedicate an officer to follow them 24/7? How do you "monitor" each crazy person / terrorist (foreign or domestic)?

Red flags on gun purchases.

This.

Sadly, I think the "right to bear arms" people in our nation might have a problem with people with an education determining that some Americans don't have the right to fully arm themselves for war.

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:26 am

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:07 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 8:16 am

Red flags on gun purchases.

This.

Sadly, I think the "right to bear arms" people in our nation might have a problem with people with an education determining that some Americans don't have the right to fully arm themselves for war.

Like you said, deternining criteria would be a challenge. It can't just be "voted for trump".

Mental health checks would be nice, but you'd need a social worker and an armed police officer, which would inevitably lead to an officer involved shooting eventually (not that it doesn't already). You can't just send unarmed social workers in alone. A girl I went to HS with was just murdered doing a welfare check for DCFS. Crazy parent stabbed her to death once she walked in the house to check how things were going with the kids.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:09 am For a guy who already underwent a psychiatric evaluation as a result of violent threats previously, why wasn’t he red flagged?

exactly

we have a national sex offender registry that seems to work pretty well

there just isn’t the political will to do anything meaningful

thoughts and prayers tho

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:59 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:26 am

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:07 am

This.

Sadly, I think the "right to bear arms" people in our nation might have a problem with people with an education determining that some Americans don't have the right to fully arm themselves for war.

Like you said, deternining criteria would be a challenge. It can't just be "voted for trump".

Mental health checks would be nice, but you'd need a social worker and an armed police officer, which would inevitably lead to an officer involved shooting eventually (not that it doesn't already). You can't just send unarmed social workers in alone. A girl I went to HS with was just murdered doing a welfare check for DCFS. Crazy parent stabbed her to death once she walked in the house to check how things were going with the kids.

Or you have them go to a person's office like you would a parole officer. There is zero need to require it to be at the house of the person; that's just asking for trouble.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:09 am For a guy who already underwent a psychiatric evaluation as a result of violent threats previously, why wasn’t he red flagged?

1) Because government computer systems suck and frequently don't talk to each other or dump data into
a common database
2) Because pro-gun lobbies have successfully lobbied for years to not have people's rights to buy guns infringed upon in any way.

"The NY SAFE Act is designed to remove firearms from those who seek to do harm to themselves or others. This means keeping the minority of individuals with serious mental illness who may be dangerous away from access to firearms. This law should not dissuade any individual from seeking mental health services they need.

The SAFE Act amends the Mental Hygiene Law (MHL) by adding section 9.46, which requires that mental health professionals who are currently providing treatment services to an individual make a report, if they conclude, using reasonable professional judgment, that the individual is likely to engage in conduct that would result in serious harm to self or others. "

Here's an FAQ on that NY Safe Act: https://safeact.ny.gov/mental-health

Lots of loopholes that give mental health providers a way out of filing anything.

The problem here is that despite the fact that the kid spent a day and a half under mental health evaluation last year for general threats against others, the mental health facility released him and either did not file an MHL 9.46 or they did and it did not show up on the background check used when purchasing firearms.

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:11 am

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:59 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:26 am

Sadly, I think the "right to bear arms" people in our nation might have a problem with people with an education determining that some Americans don't have the right to fully arm themselves for war.

Like you said, deternining criteria would be a challenge. It can't just be "voted for trump".

Mental health checks would be nice, but you'd need a social worker and an armed police officer, which would inevitably lead to an officer involved shooting eventually (not that it doesn't already). You can't just send unarmed social workers in alone. A girl I went to HS with was just murdered doing a welfare check for DCFS. Crazy parent stabbed her to death once she walked in the house to check how things were going with the kids.

Or you have them go to a person's office like you would a parole officer. There is zero need to require it to be at the house of the person; that's just asking for trouble.

Sure, but you're expecting them to actually go?

With parole it's slightly different, if they don't show up they can go back to jail. With mental health checks they haven't necessarily broken a law. So if they don't show up then what can be done?

KUTradition wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:10 am

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:09 am For a guy who already underwent a psychiatric evaluation as a result of violent threats previously, why wasn’t he red flagged?

exactly

we have a national sex offender registry that seems to work pretty well

there just isn’t the political will to do anything meaningful

thoughts and prayers tho

It's more that the gun lobby $$$ to never infringe upon anyone's right to buy a gun buys enough politicians votes than a individual politician's will to do anything meaningful doesn't matter.

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:20 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:11 am

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:59 am

Like you said, deternining criteria would be a challenge. It can't just be "voted for trump".

Mental health checks would be nice, but you'd need a social worker and an armed police officer, which would inevitably lead to an officer involved shooting eventually (not that it doesn't already). You can't just send unarmed social workers in alone. A girl I went to HS with was just murdered doing a welfare check for DCFS. Crazy parent stabbed her to death once she walked in the house to check how things were going with the kids.

Or you have them go to a person's office like you would a parole officer. There is zero need to require it to be at the house of the person; that's just asking for trouble.

Sure, but you're expecting them to actually go?

With parole it's slightly different, if they don't show up they can go back to jail. With mental health checks they haven't necessarily broken a law. So if they don't show up then what can be done?

Then right a law that states that if it is determined that you require mental health evaluation and monitoring and choose not to participate in said activities that you are subject to either jail time or mandatory commitment to a mental health facility for the period of time that the evaluation period. The problem with that is that we have too much money going to for-profit jails and not enough money going to the increased mental health facilities that would be required to support it.

It doesn't take much education to be a guard at a jail so the lower educated GOP states build lots of jails as a means of job creation. More money, more jobs. Mental health facilities require more educated staff, which thus requires a higher rate of pay. Harder for companies to make money off of those...

So we get what we get which is a system full of huge cracks that farms the poor, uneducated and mentally ill by arresting them at a ridiculously high rate to provide menial jobs and big profits while the rest of pray that we don't get killed by someone who slipped through those huge cracks.

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:25 am

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:20 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:11 am
Or you have them go to a person's office like you would a parole officer. There is zero need to require it to be at the house of the person; that's just asking for trouble.

Sure, but you're expecting them to actually go?

With parole it's slightly different, if they don't show up they can go back to jail. With mental health checks they haven't necessarily broken a law. So if they don't show up then what can be done?

Then right a law that states that if it is determined that you require mental health evaluation and monitoring and choose not to participate in said activities that you are subject to either jail time or mandatory commitment to a mental health facility for the period of time that the evaluation period.

Jailing even more people? No thanks.

It's not against the law to be mentally unstable. Nor should it be.

I'd be down for "if you miss required mental health checkups you're added to the "no buy/no own" list for guns" though. That makes sense. Throwing people in jail for being nuts sounds like a disaster and the expense would be crippling.

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:30 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:25 am

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:20 am

Sure, but you're expecting them to actually go?

With parole it's slightly different, if they don't show up they can go back to jail. With mental health checks they haven't necessarily broken a law. So if they don't show up then what can be done?

Then right a law that states that if it is determined that you require mental health evaluation and monitoring and choose not to participate in said activities that you are subject to either jail time or mandatory commitment to a mental health facility for the period of time that the evaluation period.

Jailing even more people? No thanks.

It's not against the law to be mentally unstable. Nor should it be.

I'd be down for "if you miss required mental health checkups you're added to the "no buy/no own" list for guns" though. That makes sense. Throwing people in jail for being nuts sounds like a disaster and the expense would be crippling.

I fully agree with that. I want far LESS people in prison and far more people in mental health care.

But I am realistic and see where the money flows.

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:21 am

KUTradition wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:10 am

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:09 am For a guy who already underwent a psychiatric evaluation as a result of violent threats previously, why wasn’t he red flagged?

exactly

we have a national sex offender registry that seems to work pretty well

there just isn’t the political will to do anything meaningful

thoughts and prayers tho

It's more that the gun lobby $$$ to never infringe upon anyone's right to buy a gun buys enough politicians votes than a individual politician's will to do anything meaningful doesn't matter.

those are one and the same in my mind

decisions are made, not in the best interests of the public as a whole, but rather with an eye for what will keep someone in office

it’s craven and disgusting

lol…some would rather we just throw our hands in the air and do nothing

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:31 am I want far LESS people in prison and far more people in mental health care.

But I am realistic and see where the money flows.

Agree 100%.

Dangerous people should be in jail. Habitual law breakers. Violent criminals.

Crazy people or drug addicts should be in mental health facilities or drug rehab facilities.

Although there is likely a lot of overlap.

KUTradition wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:35 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:21 am

KUTradition wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:10 am
exactly

we have a national sex offender registry that seems to work pretty well

there just isn’t the political will to do anything meaningful

thoughts and prayers tho

It's more that the gun lobby $$$ to never infringe upon anyone's right to buy a gun buys enough politicians votes than a individual politician's will to do anything meaningful doesn't matter.

those are one and the same in my mind

decisions are made, not in the best interests of the public as a whole, but rather with an eye for what will keep someone in office

it’s craven and disgusting

To be fair, it's hard to act in the best interest of the public as a whole when a majority of the public votes against their own best interest on a regular basis and votes people out of office for not doing "what they want".

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:42 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:31 am I want far LESS people in prison and far more people in mental health care.

But I am realistic and see where the money flows.

Agree 100%.

Dangerous people should be in jail. Habitual law breakers. Violent criminals.

Crazy people or drug addicts should be in mental health facilities or drug rehab facilities.

Although there is likely a lot of overlap.

I consider mental illness, physical pain, excessive stress and testosterone to be cans of gas just waiting to explode if put in the wrong environments. I am probably going to regret typing that due to the kickback but it's what I see.

KUTradition wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:36 am lol…some would rather we just throw our hands in the air and do nothing

Mission accomplished. The volume of change that is required and the amount of money it would take to overhaul it is overwhelming.

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:48 am

KUTradition wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:36 am lol…some would rather we just throw our hands in the air and do nothing

Mission accomplished. The volume of change that is required and the amount of money it would take to overhaul it is overwhelming.

sure, but it’s not impossible and can be done incrementally

there are just too many, elected and otherwise, who have already decided that a certain level of death is fully acceptable

KUTradition wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:52 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:48 am

KUTradition wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:36 am lol…some would rather we just throw our hands in the air and do nothing

Mission accomplished. The volume of change that is required and the amount of money it would take to overhaul it is overwhelming.

sure, but it’s not impossible and can be done incrementally

there are just too many, elected and otherwise, who have already decided that a certain level of death is fully acceptable

It is happening incrementally. But every Buffalo incident just proves that there are still far too many cracks in the system. At the rate we are "improving", my grandchildren's great-great grandchildren might live in a country that has a comprehensive, properly funded mental health program integrated with common sense gun laws.

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:47 am

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:42 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 10:31 am I want far LESS people in prison and far more people in mental health care.

But I am realistic and see where the money flows.

Agree 100%.

Dangerous people should be in jail. Habitual law breakers. Violent criminals.

Crazy people or drug addicts should be in mental health facilities or drug rehab facilities.

Although there is likely a lot of overlap.

I consider mental illness, physical pain, excessive stress and testosterone to be cans of gas just waiting to explode if put in the wrong environments. I am probably going to regret typing that due to the kickback but it's what I see.

Testosterone?

Good lord.

You should spend some time at a women's prison talking to the workers there.