Mass shooting in small town Texas

[The Great Zaganza]

But US gun culture won't change on its own.
As with plenty of cases in the past, new laws came first.

 

[Vixen]

According to news reports, Kelley, who was given a dishonorable discharge, a twelve-month confinement and a reduction in rank x 2, to basic airman, for assaulting his wife and child, dropped his weapon at the scene of the crime.

He made off at 95 mph (kph?) with two local citizens in hot pursuit, including a 'Johnnie Langendorff', who said he stayed in contact with police during the chase.

Kelley veered off the road into a ditch, Langendorff took aim, even though he wasn't sure whether Kelley was conscious, or not, and shot him dead.

He is being hailed as a 'hero'.

But is vigilantism heroic, when the danger had passed and the perpetrator had dropped his weapon?

Well, maybe it will be argued it was 'justifiable homicide', but far better IMV would have been to take Kelley to trial and death row, the proper way.

 

[Nessie]

Yet again this shows the problem is the failure to be well regulated. Keep guns away from criminals, mentally ill, angry people and youths and there would be few problems. That is why there are few shootings in the rest of the western world, no matter what the number and type of guns is. Only the USA failed to keep control of who has the guns.

 

[The Don]

But US gun culture won't change on its own.
As with plenty of cases in the past, new laws came first.

True, but if the expectation is that any restriction in gun ownership and/of usage will result in an immediate reduction in gun deaths then I think that's unrealistic. Indeed the failure to immediately reduce gun deaths to near zero will IMO be used by second amendment advocates to demonstrate that such restrictions only act against "responsible" gun owners and should be repealed immediately.

Unfortunately at the moment it seems to be a chicken and egg situation. It's possible that the US could be like Queensland in Australia and that a change to the gun laws could result in a change in gun culture but there's also the risk that the gun lobby is sufficiently influential that no change to laws or culture is practical.

 

[The Don]

Yet again this shows the problem is the failure to be well regulated. Keep guns away from criminals, mentally ill, angry people and youths and there would be few problems. That is why there are few shootings in the rest of the western world, no matter what the number and type of guns is. Only the USA failed to keep control of who has the guns.

This one in particular is problematical IMO. Diagnosis is often subjective, mental illness isn't necessarily a steady state (a person could be perfectly fine almost all the time) and can respond well to treatment.

Should someone be denied access to firearms because of a diagnosis years and years ago when they have responded to treatment whereas someone who carefully conceals their condition is allowed to own firearms ?

 

[Reheat]

That said, one of the things that has changed in my 15 years on the board is that I no longer think that it's just a matter of controlling access to guns. Like Darat I think that there is a cultural dimension to this which, combined with easy access to guns results in the unusually high death toll in the US.

I mostly agree with this. I have been around guns for my entire life. Even had a couple of hunting rifles in my youth. Was taught at a very early age to respect them and practice good safety.

What has changed? One reason is gangs, but I think there are other factors involved.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

For a start, I would be happy with forcing the NRA to quote the entire 2nd Amendment in all their communications and on all their plaques etc.

 

[Andy_Ross]

If only those teachers were armed, if only those theater ushers were armed. If only that church pastor was armed. If only everyone were armed.

One of my friends last night said "It'l soon be like the Wild West" but even in 1880 Tombstone you had to surrender your weapons to the sheriff when entering town. It's not just heading for the Wild West it's already there.
Background checks? Sorry, too much trouble.
Registration? Sorry, the only one allowed to keep lists of gun owners is the NRA.
Ban on non-brokered private sales? Sorry, can’t prevent ol' Uncle Joe from passing his gun on to his perfectly adjusted nephew.

 

[bluesjnr]

According to news reports, Kelley, who was given a dishonorable discharge, a twelve-month confinement and a reduction in rank x 2, to basic airman, for assaulting his wife and child, dropped his weapon at the scene of the crime.

He made off at 95 mph (kph?) with two local citizens in hot pursuit, including a 'Johnnie Langendorff', who said he stayed in contact with police during the chase.

Kelley veered off the road into a ditch, Langendorff took aim, even though he wasn't sure whether Kelley was conscious, or not, and shot him dead.

He is being hailed as a 'hero'.

But is vigilantism heroic, when the danger had passed and the perpetrator had dropped his weapon?

Well, maybe it will be argued it was 'justifiable homicide', but far better IMV would have been to take Kelley to trial and death row, the proper way.

I think you'll find that Johnnie Langendorff did no more than allow a member of the community into his truck and pursued Kelly until he crashed, they then led the police to the spot.

The member of the community was the one who had engaged Kelly earlier. It's safe to assume that he/she didn't know how many guns the murdering bastard had with him.

So, to summarise, Langendorff put himself in the way of extreme danger and allowed his vehicle to be used as a pursuit vehicle to carry an armed citizen who may have killed the animal who had just killed 26 and wounded 20. He did this unarmed.

If that isn't some form of herioic act, I don't know what is?

 

[Reheat]

This ^^^

 

[Nessie]

This one in particular is problematical IMO. Diagnosis is often subjective, mental illness isn't necessarily a steady state (a person could be perfectly fine almost all the time) and can respond well to treatment.

Should someone be denied access to firearms because of a diagnosis years and years ago when they have responded to treatment whereas someone who carefully conceals their condition is allowed to own firearms ?

No. I am just summarising those who should not have guns without going into details. For example, a fraud conviction is not a bar, but a robbery is. Angry people are those who commit assaults, domestic violence or disturbances whilst drunk. There may be an overlap with mental illness in those cases.

 

[dann]

If only those teachers were armed, if only those theater ushers were armed. If only that church pastor was armed. If only everyone were armed.

You're right! If only that psycho hadn't been …

 

[ponderingturtle]

According to news reports, Kelley, who was given a dishonorable discharge, a twelve-month confinement and a reduction in rank x 2, to basic airman, for assaulting his wife and child, dropped his weapon at the scene of the crime.

Not a dishonorable discharge, Bad Conduct discharge not dishonorable.

 

[Nessie]

Changing US gun laws is unrealistic. The Guardian has attempted to summarise them here;

https://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/jan/15/gun-laws-united-states

Here is a FAQ on the legislation required just to have a CCW in Texas;

https://www.dps.texas.gov/RSD/LTC/faqs/index.htm

The UK has a Firearms Act 1968, 60 sections with a few amendments and that is it for the whole country (NI excluded).

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/27

Like the number of guns, the number of laws and regulations has got out of control and no one can get it back under control. The only way to have control by legislation is one law covering the whole USA which simply regulates who can have a what weapons, registration etc and that is not going to happen.

The only thing the USA can do is accept the mess it made and learn to live with regular massacres.

 

[Darat]

Vixen & Rolfe - take your personal animosity with one another elsewhere.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

 

[dann]

Not a dishonorable discharge, Bad Conduct discharge not dishonorable.

What's the difference? Is a Bad Conduct discharge honorable?

 

[Nessie]

According to news reports, Kelley, who was given a dishonorable discharge, a twelve-month confinement and a reduction in rank x 2, to basic airman, for assaulting his wife and child, dropped his weapon at the scene of the crime.

He made off at 95 mph (kph?) with two local citizens in hot pursuit, including a 'Johnnie Langendorff', who said he stayed in contact with police during the chase.

Kelley veered off the road into a ditch, Langendorff took aim, even though he wasn't sure whether Kelley was conscious, or not, and shot him dead.

He is being hailed as a 'hero'.

But is vigilantism heroic, when the danger had passed and the perpetrator had dropped his weapon?

Well, maybe it will be argued it was 'justifiable homicide', but far better IMV would have been to take Kelley to trial and death row, the proper way.

Citizens defending each other and themselves is a way to cope with an inability to modify the laws, number or guns and culture. It is every man for himself as US society is far too fractured to allow the level of cooperation needed to get the USA to be able to control guns like the rest of the western world can.

 

[Vixen]

Citizens defending each other and themselves is a way to cope with an inability to modify the laws, number or guns and culture. It is every man for himself as US society is far too fractured to allow the level of cooperation needed to get the USA to be able to control guns like the rest of the western world can.

I was disconcerted to learn the usual pastor and his assistant both carry guns to the service.

What is the world coming to, when reverends have to arm themselves for a sermon? No doubt preaching 'peace' and 'turn the other cheek'.

 

[Reheat]

Not a dishonorable discharge, Bad Conduct discharge not dishonorable.

I'm not going to argue with that as it's difficult to find the answer online, but a conviction in a civilian court for domestic violence would make one disqualified for a long time, if not for life, I think.

 

[Rolfe]

The only thing the USA can do is accept the mess it made and learn to live with regular massacres.

I take your point about the complexity of the legislation, but I don't think that's the main issue. The main issue is, as you said, the culture and the mentality of the people.

It's quite an education, reading the posts on this and similar threads. I still have trouble getting my head round the outlook of people who post about the glories of the gun culture, but I at least have a better appreciation of the problem.

Australia seeme to have managed to get out from under, and so did other countries at an earlier time. (I remember reading a Victorian children's novel where a child protagonist simply went into a gun shop in London and bought a gun for a fleeing European dissident he had encountered and was sheltering.) Switzerland is eyeing up a potential problem and doing something about it. But none of these countries has the same mentality as the USA. Australia did it in response to a single horrifying incident. Britain did it incrementally after incidents like Hungerford and Dunblane. But the USA has had scores of incidents worse than these, and it doesn't cause the gun fanatics to blink.

Bowling for Columbine made this point, I think. There are other countries where guns are all over the place and they don't have this problem. Canada was mentioned I think. The difference is the mentality.

It's now a vicious circle. The current availability of firearms stokes the gun-culture mentality, and the gun-culture mentality makes damn sure nothing will be done about the availability of firearms. You simply have to live with it.

The Baptist minister's 14-year-old daughter was in church yesterday morning and is among the dead. That hits pretty close to home. I don't understand why there is no will to change things, but I think we have to accept there isn't.