Mass Shooting in California , 6 dead :(

Status
Not open for further replies.
this is straight from his manifesto:

When we finally did get to my situation, Dr. Sophy ended up giving me the same useless advice that every other psychiatrist, psychologist, and counsellor had given me in the past. I don’t know why my parents wasted money on therapy, as it will never help me in my struggle against such a cruel and unjust world. The doctor ended up dismissing it by prescribing me a controversial medication, Risperidone. After researching this medication, I found that it was the absolute wrong thing for me to take. I refused to take it, and I never saw Dr. Sophy again after that.

So, he had been seeing therapists for years, and counselors, and even a psychiatrist .. who prescribed him with Risperidone .. an anti-psychotic medication (and a very strong one) .. yet never had a mental health record???

Really????

this wasn't "over looked" it was "covered up".
 
After check the link, Victim's father and shooter's father's statement are not same, victim's father only claimed about politicians and NRA and shooter's family against guns and support gun control laws.

That's too far from being similar because two claims are different.

Victim's father could suggest that the congress hasn't pass the universal background check due to NRA opposition, along with the politicians that failed to fix the broken mental health.

The dispute in question ... the victim's father is now stating he is against guns and supports gun control laws.

Seriously? I had to go to this great length just to prove they made "similar" statements, when they are actually saying the same thing?


not directed to anyone - a side note and my opinion - a gun was not responsible for the death of the Martinez's son - a barking moonbat that had been in therapy since he was 8 years old decided to go on a murder spree. It was a senseless act. He could have chosen an axe, his car, a flight of stairs, a banana, a machete .... Although I feel his pain, it does not give him the right to remove my rights.
 
The dispute in question ... the victim's father is now stating he is against guns and supports gun control laws.

Seriously? I had to go to this great length just to prove they made "similar" statements, when they are actually saying the same thing?


not directed to anyone - a side note and my opinion - a gun was not responsible for the death of the Martinez's son - a barking moonbat that had been in therapy since he was 8 years old decided to go on a murder spree. It was a senseless act. He could have chosen an axe, his car, a flight of stairs, a banana, a machete .... Although I feel his pain, it does not give him the right to remove my rights.

Sorry, it is ABC's banner, not victim's father, it is still NOT similar statement - victim's father and shooter's family make DIFFERENT statement, so victim's father blame on NRA and politicians, but shooter's father didn't.

Too desperate to make both statements similar? Not going happen and you just provided a link to video that has no closed captioning, that useless for deaf members, including me. I already know that you still don't understand and fail to recognize about NRA's stance on universal background check.

It is best interest to leave victim's father's alone and he already lost his child and it is extremely devastated to victim's families. I'm not going playing stupid game with you about whichever statements are same or similar, also your statements are opinion.
 
Sorry, it is ABC's banner, not victim's father, it is still NOT similar statement - victim's father and shooter's family make DIFFERENT statement, so victim's father blame on NRA and politicians, but shooter's father didn't.

Too desperate to make both statements similar? Not going happen and you just provided a link to video that has no closed captioning, that useless for deaf members, including me. I already know that you still don't understand and fail to recognize about NRA's stance on universal background check.

It is best interest to leave victim's father's alone and he already lost his child and it is extremely devastated to victim's families. I'm not going playing stupid game with you about whichever statements are same or similar, also your statements are opinion.

hello Foxrac ... I just proved that the victims father blamed guns and supported gun control, there is an entire interview with him where he states just that ... it is more than blaming the NRA and Politicians.

The shooters father also blames guns and supports gun control laws. That was a statement made through his attorney.

Also, no, I am not playing games. You would be mistaken if you thought that was what I was doing. If the victim's father wants to be left alone, he should not be making statements to the public. I am also not "bothering" the victims father, I am stating my opinion here, in this thread. I am not yelling at the victims father, nor am I hindering him from grieving the loss of his child. I also do not plan to protest at the funeral, and hope no one else does for that matter. But when he states his opinion publicly, and it is a political statement - I will state my opinion as well. Its America, we can do that here.

I also do understand why the NRA is opposed to universal background checks. California has a State and Local background check for each firearm purchase .. nothing revealed anything about Elliot Rodgers mental illness .. when it should have. The NRA has been stating, for years, that background checks do nothing to prevent gun violence, and they did nothing to prevent this tragedy. They also do nothing to prevent illegal firearms purchases. Even the wait times do nothing to prevent gun violence, as Elliot was able to purchase 3.

His Aunt has even come out and stated he has been disturbed ever since he was a little boy.

he was cray cray ... it was not the NRA's fault that California's background check for firearm purchases, their 10 day wait period, and their limited magazine capacity did nothing to prevent him from stabbing 3 people and running over others. It was not any politicians fault - other than the ones supporting gun free zones and passing that legislation - which enables lunatics to go on unhindered shooting sprees there.
 
Last edited:
...The shooters father also blames guns and supports gun control laws. That was a statement made through his attorney….
I've read the statement from the attorney that you posted.

"My client's mission in life will be to try to prevent any such tragedies from ever happening again," he said. "This country, this world, needs to address mental illness and the ramifications from not recognizing these illnesses."

Shifman said the family is "staunchly against guns" and supports gun-control laws. "They are extremely, extremely upset that anybody was hurt under these circumstances," he said.

No where in that statement does it say that the shooter's father blames guns for what happened. Are you referring to some other statement? If so, can you please give us the link? I've searched and searched, and the only "blame NRA/guns" statements I can find are by the victim's father.

. . . If the victim's father wants to be left alone, he should not be making statements to the public. I am also not "bothering" the victims father, I am stating my opinion here, in this thread. I am not yelling at the victims father, nor am I hindering him from grieving the loss of his child. I also do not plan to protest at the funeral, and hope no one else does for that matter. But when he states his opinion publicly, and it is a political statement - I will state my opinion as well. Its America, we can do that here….
Why would you even think that people would protest the father's statement at a victim's funeral? That's bizarre.

No, it was not a political statement--it was a grieving father lashing out his emotions. Give it a rest. If a serious movement against guns results from this rampage, then you can start a new political debate thread.
 
Sorry, it is ABC's banner, not victim's father, it is still NOT similar statement - victim's father and shooter's family make DIFFERENT statement, so victim's father blame on NRA and politicians, but shooter's father didn't.

Too desperate to make both statements similar? Not going happen and you just provided a link to video that has no closed captioning, that useless for deaf members, including me. I already know that you still don't understand and fail to recognize about NRA's stance on universal background check.

It is best interest to leave victim's father's alone and he already lost his child and it is extremely devastated to victim's families. I'm not going playing stupid game with you about whichever statements are same or similar, also your statements are opinion.
To let you know, it has CC. Position your mouse pointer onto video, CC button appears on upper left corner. It even has a customization feature.
 
I also do understand why the NRA is opposed to universal background checks. California has a State and Local background check for each firearm purchase .. nothing revealed anything about Elliot Rodgers mental illness .. when it should have. The NRA has been stating, for years, that background checks do nothing to prevent gun violence, and they did nothing to prevent this tragedy. They also do nothing to prevent illegal firearms purchases. Even the wait times do nothing to prevent gun violence, as Elliot was able to purchase 3.

His Aunt has even come out and stated he has been disturbed ever since he was a little boy.
If that's a fact, then that's THE PROBLEM.
 
I've read the statement from the attorney that you posted.



No where in that statement does it say that the shooter's father blames guns for what happened. Are you referring to some other statement? If so, can you please give us the link? I've searched and searched, and the only "blame NRA/guns" statements I can find are by the victim's father.


Why would you even think that people would protest the father's statement at a victim's funeral? That's bizarre.

No, it was not a political statement--it was a grieving father lashing out his emotions. Give it a rest. If a serious movement against guns results from this rampage, then you can start a new political debate thread.


I feel Steinhauer is making this more about his rights to own a gun than the fact the 6 innocent people where killed and there are now six families grieving for the lost of their loves . Their emotions are very raw right now and I can't believe anyone would think of judging what they are saying right now. You can see and feel the pain that father is in right now. This is
just too tragic to being happening allover again.
 
I feel Steinhauer is making this more about his rights to own a gun than the fact the 6 innocent people where killed and there are now six families grieving for the lost of their loves . Their emotions are very raw right now and I can't believe anyone would think of judging what they are saying right now. You can see and feel the pain that father is in right now. This is
just too tragic to being happening allover again.
Stein is easily pissed off, even though he should let it go.
 
hello Foxrac ... I just proved that the victims father blamed guns and supported gun control, there is an entire interview with him where he states just that ... it is more than blaming the NRA and Politicians.

The shooters father also blames guns and supports gun control laws. That was a statement made through his attorney.

Also, no, I am not playing games. You would be mistaken if you thought that was what I was doing. If the victim's father wants to be left alone, he should not be making statements to the public. I am also not "bothering" the victims father, I am stating my opinion here, in this thread. I am not yelling at the victims father, nor am I hindering him from grieving the loss of his child. I also do not plan to protest at the funeral, and hope no one else does for that matter. But when he states his opinion publicly, and it is a political statement - I will state my opinion as well. Its America, we can do that here.

I also do understand why the NRA is opposed to universal background checks. California has a State and Local background check for each firearm purchase .. nothing revealed anything about Elliot Rodgers mental illness .. when it should have. The NRA has been stating, for years, that background checks do nothing to prevent gun violence, and they did nothing to prevent this tragedy. They also do nothing to prevent illegal firearms purchases. Even the wait times do nothing to prevent gun violence, as Elliot was able to purchase 3.

His Aunt has even come out and stated he has been disturbed ever since he was a little boy.

he was cray cray ... it was not the NRA's fault that California's background check for firearm purchases, their 10 day wait period, and their limited magazine capacity did nothing to prevent him from stabbing 3 people and running over others. It was not any politicians fault - other than the ones supporting gun free zones and passing that legislation - which enables lunatics to go on unhindered shooting sprees there.

Thanks to CrazyPaul for helped me to locate the closed captioning and I finished watch this video.

It doesn't change my result - victim's father and shooter's family's statements are not same nor similar, victim's father talks about politicians and NRA, also semiautomatic pistols that mention in this video, but shooter's family against on guns and didn't mention about NRA or politicians.

NRA didn't support or help the congress to fix the broken mental health system because they don't want gun owners to be compromised, such as loss of access to guns after they get diagnose with mental illness. All states, including California use NICS to check the background but some pro-gun articles claimed that change to NICS can be permanent if local LEO (city police, sheriff), state police, FBI or ATF make report to this system to make ineligible to buy guns. The sheriff said shooter bought guns legally and his background was clean because nobody report his mental status to NICS. I think NICS need to be tweak and require medical communities to report about mental illness, along with LEO need improve the awareness and communication. I'm not surprised that California has worst mental health system and many people with mental illness ended up in the jail or prison.

California banned assault weapon in 1989 but there is CA compliant AR-15 as well. The gun control laws in 1960s and 1970s were originally deal with gangs problem that where young people could buy guns legally, but now, they buy guns from black market or steal from anywhere. Due to change in socioeconomic, the crime in California went down from late 1980s and early 1990s due to anti-gangs program and discourage young people from joining the gangs, but it didn't completely go away. Georgia has gangs problem as well and GA legislature passed anti-gangs measures to deal with gangs problem. Even with CCW or OC, you can be surprisingly gunned down by gangs during drive-by shooting on street. I agree about CCW and CC are very effective for robbery, assault and burglary, but outcome may different, depending on your experience, state of mind, size of groups and other factors, but for gangs, it may not work unless you are in armed groups. There is one problem - California has lower gun ownership and OC/CCW have no benefits to help the victims because not many people carry guns to save the victim's life, but it work very well for yourself because you carry gun with you.

You need to understand that victim's father lost his child and it is big deal to their family. It is extremely devastated and lost child cannot recover. It is not good idea to criticize him for his statements, also he lives in California that where guns are not part of their culture, except for inland rural and hunting. It is not my type to criticize the victims and I respect them, even if they are against on guns. I prefer to have a fair compensation for anti-gun supporters and pro-gun supporters to fix the system without lose the rights to arm or increase of shooting related events, especially that what background check means. I'm not censoring your speech and I don't care if you criticize Michael Bloomberg, Feinstein, Pelosi or Obama because they are not victim.

I'm sorry for really long post and I'm not gun nut that you seen in Chipotle incident. I'm fine with OC/CCW handgun for mature people with no mental illness. Seriously, I don't believe that immature people should have access to guns. I'm planning to buy handgun and possibly shotgun for my self-defense at home when I'm ready go on my own, even it is legal in CA.
 
To let you know, it has CC. Position your mouse pointer onto video, CC button appears on upper left corner. It even has a customization feature.

Stein is easily pissed off, even though he should let it go.

Thanks for locate the closed captioning.

I'm apologize for making fun of you for support gun control laws and assault weapon ban, and I respect your opinion.

There is no assault weapon involved in mass shooting.
 
now all we need are all the gun control nuts to start saying "if there were no guns this would not happen". He could have used an ax or a hammer then where would we be? Could not cut down a tree or build a house.


It's tough to kill or injure a lot of people with an ax or hammer in the short amount of time this nut was doing it. Also the first hit doesn't have the same ability to kill as a gun does, it's hard to outrun a bullet. I'm not a gun control freak, but I do think there should be limits on how many you own and what type and perhaps you should have to be screened better if you are buying a lot of weapons in a short period of time. I played hockey with someone who had been a navy seal and the joke at the rink was don't lose any hair because Scott could take it and kill you with it, but we didn't all shave our heads! Just he did!
 
It's tough to kill or injure a lot of people with an ax or hammer in the short amount of time this nut was doing it. Also the first hit doesn't have the same ability to kill as a gun does, it's hard to outrun a bullet. I'm not a gun control freak, but I do think there should be limits on how many you own and what type and perhaps you should have to be screened better if you are buying a lot of weapons in a short period of time. I played hockey with someone who had been a navy seal and the joke at the rink was don't lose any hair because Scott could take it and kill you with it, but we didn't all shave our heads! Just he did!

what good will that do if all it takes is one gun to massacre people?

this lunatic killed 2 people with a knife... hurted several people with his car... shot 4 people...

so gun is non-issue in this tragedy.... it's a distraction from real tragedy.... a disturbed boy with a very violent misogynist view.
 
It's tough to kill or injure a lot of people with an ax or hammer in the short amount of time this nut was doing it. Also the first hit doesn't have the same ability to kill as a gun does, it's hard to outrun a bullet. I'm not a gun control freak, but I do think there should be limits on how many you own and what type and perhaps you should have to be screened better if you are buying a lot of weapons in a short period of time. I played hockey with someone who had been a navy seal and the joke at the rink was don't lose any hair because Scott could take it and kill you with it, but we didn't all shave our heads! Just he did!
Different guns for different purposes, which is why some people own multiple guns. (If someone wants to do damage, it can be done with one gun.) I don't see any reason for limiting the number, even if they buy several at one time. The buyer may have gotten a tax refund or bonus or gift money and want to treat himself/herself while the price is good.

In this tragic case, the shooter combined weapons with transportation--that made his rampage even more destructive. He could move quickly from site to site, and even use the car itself to cause more injury.

It's not the weapons that need more control; it's the twisted minds and souls that need more control.
 
Different guns for different purposes, which is why some people own multiple guns. (If someone wants to do damage, it can be done with one gun.) I don't see any reason for limiting the number, even if they buy several at one time. The buyer may have gotten a tax refund or bonus or gift money and want to treat himself/herself while the price is good.

In this tragic case, the shooter combined weapons with transportation--that made his rampage even more destructive. He could move quickly from site to site, and even use the car itself to cause more injury.

It's not the weapons that need more control; it's the twisted minds and souls that need more control.

From what the shooter wrote about his DR. , I would say doctors need to take their patients more serious ,the shooter's dr. just threw some pills at the shooter and send him on his way. I would really love to see the shooter's DR. made some kind of statement if the family would allow them to .
 
I've read the statement from the attorney that you posted.



No where in that statement does it say that the shooter's father blames guns for what happened. Are you referring to some other statement? If so, can you please give us the link? I've searched and searched, and the only "blame NRA/guns" statements I can find are by the victim's father.


Why would you even think that people would protest the father's statement at a victim's funeral? That's bizarre.

No, it was not a political statement--it was a grieving father lashing out his emotions. Give it a rest. If a serious movement against guns results from this rampage, then you can start a new political debate thread.

My statement concerning leaving the victims father alone was in response to another comment posted by Foxrac. I am not bothering the victims father. I am stating an opinion.

Why do you feel I should "give it a rest"? we have already discussed how we disagree on the interpretation of the statements made by the shooters father and the victims father and I have moved on. I have also not changed my stance that what they have both said was the exact same thing. I have already shared all the relevant links - yet you still ... disagree. Well ... ok. We disagree.

Do I need to post a link, or source, so that you can "school" me on why someone should not disagree with you?

If you read what I actually said, I made mention that the victims father and the shooters father made similar statements. And they both did. They both blames guns. if this were not so, no blame would have been placed on the NRA, and peter Rodgers would not have specifically made a point to mention he was "against guns". These were political statements. I don't care if you are attempting to "shield" the fact that these were political statements behind "but the victims father was grieving". He still does not have the right to take away my rights (i.e. the gun free zone where his son was killed). Now ... the media is attempting to portray him as a gun rights activist ... most gun grabbers do this. If I need to explain what a gun grabber is, I would be happy to do so. They usually start a statement with "I am for the right to self defense ... but ..."

there is no "but" and the 2nd Amendment will not be infringed ... period.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top