Florida High School Shooting

Page 61 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
ultimately, yes. It would be the wars to end all wars. Although, if I am being honest, I would like to see the rest of the world disarmed first, Russia especially. I think a lot of the gun control propaganda is coming out of Russia so that we are weak when they prepare to strike.

I'm sure you have no idea how nutty that really is. Not a clue.
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,041
136
credible threat = questioning
that could lead to mental evaluation, and being put hospitalized, and losing his firearms.
that would equate to no shooting
He had been questioned many times in the past by law enforcement, didn’t seem to be an issue to them..
 

Puffnstuff

Lifer
Mar 9, 2005
16,255
4,928
136
ghost guns require machine work to finish, some states even require them to be registered

some states also require private sales to go through a dealer and background check done
The point is that someone with criminal intent has access to an 80% completed firearm with nothing more than a cc and a mailing address.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,978
31,534
146
This is incorrect. If someone is deemed to be a threat to themselves or others, you can Baker Act them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Mental_Health_Act



Enjoy.

I think what is going on is that NRA fluffers like GOP voters have decided to outsource mental health determinations to the firearm background check process. "See, he passed!" Nothing more could have been done, because the background check cleared him of mental health issues...

Nothing could be done because he was fine and a responsible gun owner. Why would local authorities have initiated involuntary assesments when the approved system already cleared him?
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,041
136
Well, stop sending your thoughts and prayers, Drumpf is out on the golf course today, guess that means wait till the next one happens.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
So dishonest. There was one tip that was mishandled at the lowest level of the bureau-

http://time.com/5162999/fbi-failed-investigate-tip-nikolas-cruz/

I'm sure they get lots of tips like that.

And each one needs to be vetted and that does not appear to have been done here. A quick search into him would have revealed that he had abused animals, been in trouble for violence, had mental health issues, lost a parent, and was making threats.

All of which would have been enough to start something.

From your article.

That information should have been forwarded to the FBI’s Miami field office for agents to investigate, but it was not.

“We have determined that these protocols were not followed,” a statement from the FBI read.

Are you trying to say that the FBI only does something if it gets 2 or more tips?
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
so that means local authorities in FL messed up, not the FBI.

No, because the tip was given to the FBI, and the FBI should have given local FBI and police the heads up, and they did not. They have so far admitted that they were supposed to do that and did not. So no, its not on local authorities because the FBI never told them.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
I think what is going on is that NRA fluffers like GOP voters have decided to outsource mental health determinations to the firearm background check process. "See, he passed!" Nothing more could have been done, because the background check cleared him of mental health issues...

Nothing could be done because he was fine and a responsible gun owner. Why would local authorities have initiated involuntary assesments when the approved system already cleared him?

They should have once the FBI notified them of the tip off to examine him. Local authorities would have looked at his history of which is very long and likely deemed him a threat. The kid had a violent history and that likely would have been enough for an examination at the very least. The FBI simply dropped the ball.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
I'm sure that would be a very disturbing statistic.

If you cant keep up with tips, then how in the hell are you going to keep up with the work required to ban guns?

Either the government is competent enough to track down leads, or they are not. If this is too hard for them, so is something like banning guns.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,225
55,768
136
The idea that the FBI was going to interview him and then have him involuntarily committed is an absurd fantasy.

I mean give me a break.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
And each one needs to be vetted and that does not appear to have been done here. A quick search into him would have revealed that he had abused animals, been in trouble for violence, had mental health issues, lost a parent, and was making threats.

All of which would have been enough to start something.

From your article.



Are you trying to say that the FBI only does something if it gets 2 or more tips?

Are you really that dishonest? Brandonbull dishonestly claimed several warnings.

The FBI admits they dropped the ball. I'm not seeing any admissions from Rick Scott or local authorities as to their own part. Quite the contrary. Just pin it on he FBI, call for the director to resign over a very low level mistake.

It's shameful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Younigue

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,686
136
If you cant keep up with tips, then how in the hell are you going to keep up with the work required to ban guns?

Either the government is competent enough to track down leads, or they are not. If this is too hard for them, so is something like banning guns.

I have not suggested banning guns.
 

Younigue

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2017
5,888
1,447
106
Law abiding people buy guns for lawful purposes. The shooter was mentally disturbed and officials involved with his evaluations should be called into question for their previous assessments. There are plenty of instances where people have burned down entire city blocks playing with matches and if you google search for arsonists you will find that they wreak havoc every year using fire.

Mental health issues are becoming more prevalent in our society and gun laws need to be amended to reflect this new reality, however, as a law abiding person I do not want my rights trampled upon. Group punishment is not the answer. The laws governing gun ownership should be carefully rewritten to include closing up existing loopholes for gun acquisition such as ghost guns, private sales and gifting to prevent persons who could not lawfully obtain a weapon via a background check from having access to obtain one. As long as the extreme left only wants to take the guns away this will go nowhere and the standoff will continue unabated.
When arsonists become the problem that gun nuts are their "rights" should be trampled on as well. The argument that they want to take ALL your guns is ridiculous. I want to take your fu*ked up guns away. There is absolutely No GOOD Reason for any one to own a gun that can kill so many people all at once. Name a good reason to own such a gun? Seriously I don't give one iota about the fact that you're responsible. If you were truly a responsible human being you'd want these kinds of guns out of the hands of civilians.

Collectors can collect Beanie Babies. Let them try to kill 17 people throwing those at them.
 
Last edited:

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
39,811
33,428
136
They should have once the FBI notified them of the tip off to examine him. Local authorities would have looked at his history of which is very long and likely deemed him a threat. The kid had a violent history and that likely would have been enough for an examination at the very least. The FBI simply dropped the ball.
Locals already had his history and nothing was done.

And yes the FBI failed to do their part as well