Carmel Indiana Murder - Suicide

[mikeb302000]

You don't even need to read it. http://www.indystar.com/article/20111012/LOCAL0101/310120004/2-dead-shootings-Carmel-complex?odyssey=tab">topnews|text|IndyStar.com|We should call this Murder Suicide Type A: man shoots and kills estranged wife or girl friend and then turns the gun on himself.

What's important to realize is this. While much of the country's attention is on the http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2011/10/ultimate-bad-hair-day-in-california.html">California Salon Killings, this was happening in Indiana, and not only there. In fifty other locations during that same 24-hour period people died from gun shots. And the same is happening all over again today, and again tomorrow.

The reason? Well, a big part of the reason is gun availability, which combined with a number of other volatile factors adds up to a disgraceful and embarrassing situation for our great country. But, far from being ashamed of it, or god forbid, taking responsibility for it, the pro-gun voices keep talking their trash about self defense and the Second Amendment.

Trash is what that talk is in the light of 80 dead bodies a day, day after day, year after year.

Here's http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2011/08/my-official-goal.html">my goal and here's http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2011/09/solution.html">my solution.

[PavePusher]

1. I didn't shoot anyone.

What's my "responsibility" for any of these crimes?

[ileus]

31. You own guns...

duh!

[tblue]

2. It drove it home for me when I was in England

and people said they were afraid to come to the US because we shoot people here. And these were not stupid or uninformed people. From overseas, we look so reckless and shortsighted. I guess it's cuz we are.

I hate guns. If they were all destroyed today, I wouldn't miss them.

[hack89]

5. They live in a country that had to institute knife control

because of a violent "knife culture" and a huge problem with binge drinking. My British friends are shocked that you can walk in downtown Boston at night without be threatened by packs of drunk young adults.

What you should tell those people that crime rates are at historic lows - the lowest in 50 years. And they are steadily declining. If they stay out of areas know for drugs and gang violence, the odds of them being shot are very very low.

[tblue]

8. Of course I told them we don't get shot everywhere

but that's what the meme is over there. Because that's what's in the news.

[jeepnstein]

15. The shootings are for the most part avoidable.

Sure, we get a crazy going off every once in a while like Loughner, or the creeps at Columbine. Happens in Europe too. Monsters are real and they look just like you and me.

The overwhelming bulk of the victims of violence in this country are in some kind of social interaction with their attackers. I'm not saying blame the victim but I am saying that folks need to recognize when they're in danger and act accordingly. I do blame society in general and our willingness to explain away all sorts of atrocious behavior.

Most of our gang bangers that wind up getting shot know full well what they're doing is stupid and illegal, yet they go on their merry way until the inevitable happens. Then everyone gathers and mourns the poor youth who was about to get his life turned around. Nobody offered to do a thing for him when he was choosing to live the thug life.

I can't tell you how many battered women I've seen who just aren't able to make a clean break from their abusers. They wind up taking the bait and "coming home" to another good beating. Society spends a little bit of money putting the abusers in jail eventually but that doesn't break the cycle of violence. Domestic violence laws get tougher and tougher, except nobody bothers to enforce them. Nobody wants to get involved.

We push the mentally ill out into a society that doesn't want to deal with them and that certainly doesn't want to provide access to mental health care. Then everyone gets bent when we find someone swinging from the rafters or running naked down main street dripping in blood. Our courts demand that addicts get clean. Problem is nobody wants to provide detox or for the huge number of uninsured.

"They ought to do something". In America "They" is "Us". And we're dropping the ball.

[rrneck]

18. +1000 nt

[mikeb302000]

63. it's nice when you and I agree, rrneck

jeepnstein made a great comment. I put a link to my solution in the post.

[SteveM]

61. Thumbs way up! nt

[SteveM]

60. "What's in the news." Now, that's coming closer to the real thing...

You're right about "...we don't get shot everywhere." Most violent crime in this country can be traced, geographically, to some very confined areas in cities, and often these crimes are committed by repeat-felons.

Incidentally, you may wish to read up on the history of mainstream media with regards the gun-control debate. It may go a long way in explaining "what's in the news."

[mikeb302000]

62. and you, Steve, need to check out that

NRA nonsense that most of the violence is gang related. You should stop repeating things you've heard just because they're convenient for your argument.

[SteveM]

67. Are you even keeping up with this thread?

More straw, more irrelevancy. You can start by checking out the poster's remarks about "what's in the news." For Britishers.

[SteveM]

69. More corrections for you, Mike...

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvmurd.html

Excerpted from, Kates, Don B., et. al, Guns and Public Health: Epidemic of Violence or Pandemic of Propaganda? Originally published as 61 Tenn. L. Rev. 513-596 (1994):

"Looking only to official criminal records, data over the past thirty years consistently show that the mythology of murderers as ordinary citizens does not hold true. Studies have found that approximately 75% of murderers have adult criminal records, and that murderers average a prior adult criminal career of six years, including four major adult felony arrests. These studies also found that when the murder occurred "bout 11% of murder arrestees actually on pre-trial release"--that is, they were awaiting trial for another offense."

"The fact that only 75% of murderers have adult crime records should not be misunderstood as implying that the remaining 25% of murderers are non-criminals. The reason over half of those 25% of murderers don't have adult records is that they are juveniles. Thus, by definition they cannot have an adult criminal record."

___________________
Let's get one thing clear, Mike. No where did I use the term "gang-related." YOU used the term. The above data comes from FBI sources, as you will discover, and not from the NRA. I will repeat these arguments steadily, because they are the truth, sir. And you refuse (I choose to use this word specifically) to acknowledge the truth because it is not "...convenient for your argument."

All clear, now?

[Hoyt]

17. We have knife controls here. In fact, I can't walk down street with a sword, but I can carry guns.

How's that for being rational. We have too many guns and allow people to carry them in too many places. And those in the so-called "gun culture" push the envelope no matter what laws are passed.

We need a change in attitude on guns that moves us into the 21st Century.

[hack89]

19. Nothing like Englands - you can't even walk around with a pocket knife

unless you can prove that it is directly related to your work.

[Hoyt]

22. So are the masses there calling for reform, or is it just a few insecure people

who feel they need weapons?

[hack89]

40. So only insecure people carry pocket knives?

Really?

[Hoyt]

41. That is not what I said. Quit reading one word at a time, you'll comprehend better.

[hack89]

42. You replied to a post that specifically talked about pocket knives

how was I to know that you wanted to change the subject?

[Hoyt]

43. Christ, and you carry a gun in public.

[hack89]

45. Yes - isn't it wonderful we live in a country not filled with fearful people like England? nt

[Hoyt]

47. They sound brave and rational, compared to those who have to strap a gun or two on to go out.

[hack89]

49. They give up basic civil liberties because of pocket knives?

that is brave?

[Hoyt]

52. Guns are not a civil liberity, sorry -- well unless you are born with one.

[hack89]

54. So warrant-less fit into your idea of civil liberties? Really. nt

[hack89]

55. So the Bill of Rights doesn't contain civil liberties? nt

[rl6214]

53. You do know just how idiotic you sound don't you?

Take your strapon or two and find a new shtick

[Hoyt]

57. Not really compared to folks who have to strap gun(s) on to interact with public.

[friendly_iconoclast]

20. Yes, yes, we know all about the prohibitionist desire for culture war

God knows you lot mention it more often these days since the attempt at a new assault weapon ban has stalled.

Frustration is making the mask slip, so we no longer get the calls for 'reasonable' and 'common-sense gun control laws'

So long as the largest gun control group is outnumbered 80 to 1 by the NRA alone, that "change in attitude on guns that moves us into the 21st Century." isn't going to happpen.

[hack89]

21. The Brits have another law I am sure you will approve of

mere suspicion of carrying a knife is sufficient reason for the police to search you and your car.

[Hoyt]

23. Once again, how many people are against those laws?

[friendly_iconoclast]

25. Popularity of a law is a metric of how just it is?

You must have approved of Proposition 8 in California, then...

[Hoyt]

27. If enough Brits wanted knives and guns, they's be vocal about it. They are rational enough to know

they are better off with out a bunch of armed fools running around in public.

[friendly_iconoclast]

32. Actually, I was referring to the "search upon suspicion" part of the law.

And you've already advocated for that here in the States, Constitution be damned...

[hack89]

39. What parts of a police state wouldn't you support?

how scared would you have to be to approve of warrant-less searches by the police?

[DonP]

44. He's one of those people that can't imagine it ever applying to him

Just all of the rude toters out there who should get what they deserve.

A lot of the folks that seem to love the UK gun laws or Japan's bans don't seem to know much about the other civil rights those people give up to live in these "gun free utopias.

In the UK you and your property can be searched without a warrant, just on the suspicion of a policeman who feels that exigent circumstances are in effect.

I wonder how he'd feel the first time the police made him get out of his car for a search just because they didn't like his looks or color of his skin?

People who are dumb enough to blindly trust the government to be fair and just, obviously either never lived under the Bush/Cheney regime, or have a very short and selective memory I guess.

[hack89]

46. I bet he has a favorite brown shirt he wears in private. nt

[Hoyt]

48. Nope and I don't consider guns hanging off people in public is "progressive" either.

[hack89]

50. We are talking about knives

you support warrant-less searches because of pocket knives.

[Hoyt]

51. Naw, you are posting about "brown shirts" who carry weapons'/guns to intimidate those they fear.

[hack89]

56. Actually I was talking about brown shirts that support warrant-less searches

to take away peoples guns.

[mikeb302000]

64. I'm not the one who's scared.

the frightened insecure guys who carry or own guns for self-defense, they're the scared ones. And the irony is in most cases they have nothing ot be afraid of, they'll never need the gun.

This has nothing to do with a police state. That's exaggerated bullshit meant to inflame and misdirect. What I'm talking about is higher standards for folks to qualify to own guns.

[hack89]

66. So warrant-less police searches have a place in a free society? Really? nt

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

36. Actually living in SoCal you most likely can not carry concealed

Have you actually tried to get a permit from the Pasadena police or LA County Sheriff?

[We_Have_A_Problem]

6. Why do you harbor...

..such an intense feeling for an inanimate object?

Guns are simply a tool - nothing more. They are an inert machine unless and until a human being chooses to do something with them.

Pretty silly thing to hate, if you ask me.

[tblue]

9. Why do you say it's silly?

And why do I have to be like you? I don't tell you to think like me.

Everybody's different. You aren't me and I'm not you. Guns don't bother you, but they bother me.

IF YOU REALLY NEED AN ANSWER: More people, including individuals I have known, would be alive without guns. Children wouldn't shoot people, and have to live with that guilt, without guns. I don't know....just a quirk of mine I guess. If you don't understand that, there's probably not much I can say to explain it.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

13. Because it is silly.

Hating an object is kinda stupid in my opinion.

I am sorry for your loss, but the gun was not at fault. The fault lies with the action of a human being somewhere along the line. I have also lost friends due to a gunshot. I have never considered the gun at fault.

You blame the gun because it is an easy target.

[gravity556]

33. You do realize that in the UK, you stood a much greater chance of being assaulted than

in the US?

I'm not going to pull links for you, because the best way to learn is doing it yourself, but you might want to look at the actual crime rates in the two countries.

And really, a bunch of gangbangers shooting it out with each other over drug profits or fashion choices is a differnent animal than being randomly attacked by some piss drunk yob looking for a little fun fisticuffs.

And they have a whole "knife culture" problem. As in, the problem is so bad, a pocket knife is a ticket to jail. Why? Because their asshole problem children have issues laying hands on guns, so they just use a box cutter. Knives are just as deadly if not more so than a firearm, and folks have been killing one another with pointy things for all of human history. Except for the period when we used rocks tied to sticks.

[Common Sense Party]

37. 'And these were not stupid or uninformed people. '

Apparently they were.

[SteveM]

59. When people come from England, they often have a different view...

I've asked them when they visit Texas: Is this the place you've read/heard/seen about? And they answer: No.

And much to their delight. They like the food, the friendliness, the clubs, the culture. And they want to come back. Oh, and one even said they wish they could try hunting (rich person's sport over there). But the ones you mention have to look "from overseas..." Funny, how travel broadens the mind?

[tblue]

3. I really like your goal & solution.

I don't know why they'd be a stretch for a civilized society.

[gejohnston]

7. because his solution will do nothing

and history shows that. Please define "civilized". Gun control did nothing in these countries. Certainly not UK, which changed nothing. Jamaica has a UK style gun ban and makes us look like Denmark.
Personally, I have a problem with the word "civilized". It is a term imperial powers described themselves while building empires at the cost of other societies that were deemed as "savage".

[tblue]

10. Oy gevalt on a popsicle stick!

Who cares?!!!

[gejohnston]

12. you asked

I care.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

14. Who cares?

Those of us who actually care about our rights.

[Common Sense Party]

38. What is his solution? Care to copy and paste?

He won't share it here, and I've no desire to boost his blog ratings.

[mikeb302000]

65. aren't you placing a bit too much value on your

one little click. Do you really think that's what it's all about?

[Common Sense Party]

70. Aren't you placing a bit too much value on your cherished blog links?

That's what it's all about, apparently.

[rl6214]

4. What's your goal and solution, lay it out

Don't hide them behind blind links to your blog. If you REALLY wanted to make a change and stop any gun violence, you wouldn't hide your SOLUTION in your blog. You don't have an original thought that makes any sense, that's why you hide it in your blog. If you posted your ideas here you would be exposed.

You continue to hide from your illegal gun ownership in italy, write your blog from your comfy UN chair while NOT doing your job feeding the poor and we'll worry about our guns here in the US.

Unrec for the usual reasons.

[friendly_iconoclast]

24. Though lately he likes to deny it, his goal is no guns at all in civilian hands

Do they not have the Wayback Machine or Google in Italy? Because there's no real way to misconstrue this:

http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-pro-gun-folks-wont-be-reasonable.html

....All right, I was exaggerating. If you guys suddenly cooperated with the common sense gun control laws that we propose and we saw a tremendous decrease in gun violence, we would naturally want stricter laws in order to lower even more the remaining gun violence. Eventually, I and most of the others would conclude that no guns at all in civilian hands is the best way to go.

So, in order to ensure that the three-steps-down-the-line situation never happens, you resist even obvious things like background checks and licensing and registration.

That's why you're in the wrong, not us. You see? If you cooperated and we reneged on our promise, which I admit we probably would, then we would be the wrong ones. But with your never-give-an-inch attitude, you are the wrong ones.

I guess that was a little too candid, so Mikey's been, ah ummm prevaricating a little bit about his true feelings recently:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=445487#446022

And that's why we'd be fools to compromise with gun control advocates. Let them express all the poutrage they want, their
own words tell us all we need to know about them

[ileus]

28. add LEO's to that list.

[ileus]

30. That's why we have to keep fighting the good fight.

[gejohnston]

11. Most of our problems?

What is this our shit? If it worked so well, why did not Canada's crime rate drop after parliament passed the 1977 law? It is basically what you want. OK, so felons can legally own guns there. While Canada has been stricter on handguns than the US since 1934, yet laxer on machine guns (which did not even have to be registered until 1953, not licensed until the "prohibited" class of weapon was created in 1977) yet there were no machine gun fights in the streets.
Russia is a pretty gun free society. Has very few gun deaths, Oh did I mention that their murder rate is four times ours? Then there is Jamaica and Brazil.

Sorry not buying it. Most of it is still gangster vs gangster, fueled and funded bong owners and the war on drugs. They are more responsible for our problems than we are.

[ileus]

16. our great country...this happened in Italy?

[friendly_iconoclast]

26. He thinks the more he acts like he hates the US, the more the Italians will like him.

It seems to happen with certain expats. There was some (now-tombstoned) berk who had emigrated to Australia that was a veritable
Dr. Pangloss when it came to what a "fine society" they had, and how awful things are in the States.

Sadly, I never got the chance to ask him if a "fine society" was anything like a Great Society...

[Glassunion]

29. Your goal and solution are vague and leave a lot of questions.

My biggest problems with gun control legislation is that it not only infringes on the 2nd Amendment, but 9 out of 10 times(IMO) it specifically infringes on other civil rights based solely on the fact that one wishes to be a gun owner. This IMO is not how a progressive democracy should work. One who wishes to exercise one civil right, should not be left with a decision to sacrifice their other rights to meet that end.

GOAL:

Extremely strict gun control laws enforced nationally which would disqualify about half the present gun owners. Since that half, although legal under today's rules, is responsible for much of the trouble including gun flow into the criminal world, the results would be tremendous.

Let's break this down...
"Extremely strict gun control laws enforced nationally which would disqualify about half the present gun owners." Kinda vague there for one thing. For another thing, you have absolutely ZERO research or facts to back up your claim that 1/2 of the 80 million gun owners in this country would be disqualified. You are basically making a statement that 1/4 of all adult(18+) Americans are criminals, who should be denied a civil right without any evidence. This statement alone also leaves me with the question: "How do you feel about the 4th Amendment?"

Since that half, although legal under today's rules, is responsible for much of the trouble including gun flow into the criminal world, the results would be tremendous. You CANNOT back up this claim whatsoever with any real research or facts. It does not exist outside of your own opinion. Please do explain, in detail; your claim on how 40 million Americans are personally responsible for gun flow into the hands of criminals. I would love to hear it.

The problem with your goal is that it is vague, and not based in fact and flies in the face of civil rights.

SOLUTION:

1. licensing of gun owners, requiring criminal and mental health background checks.
2. registration of all guns bought.
3. no transfers without the recipient being a licensed gun owner and submitting to another background check - every time.

Safe storage laws, magazine capacity limitations and waiting periods may be eventually added, but the big three above will solve most of our problems.

1. When you buy a gun in today's day and age from an FFL, you have a background check run. Your mental history is also checked. I have no issue with this. However, licensing a gun owner will have no effect on crime rates. This has been shown true time and again in states that require it.

2. Registration will have zero effect on crime as well. This also has shown to be true time and again in states that require it. I have put the call out there many times on this very board for any person to give me one example of where registration of firearms in states that require it has in fact reduced crime. So far I have yet to receive even one response. I have also asked for an example for where the registration of a firearm in states that require it, was the primary evidence leading to the capture and prosecution of an individual who committed a crime. I have yet to receive an answer.

3. Personally I think that ALL transfers should be performed along with a background check. Licensing would have no bearing on the legality, nor the safety of the public in the transfer.

You say that these 3 things will "solve most of our problems", however you failed to give any evidence to back up the statement.

Personally, we could save more lives and/or improve more lives by ending certain strict gun control programs. I'll use NY state as an example.
- Particular gun control measure(Ballistic Fingerprinting) in NY state has saved 0 lives and has solved 0 crimes in 10 years.
- They could have taken the same money and fed 2,469 people 3 wholesome, balanced and healthy meals a day, every single day for 10 years. That works out to over 27 million meals served.

My questions are simple...
How many people have been saved by gun registration in NY state? How many people could have been housed and/or fed instead?
How many people have been saved by owner licensing in NY state? How many people could have been housed and/or fed instead?

[krispos42]

34. And our non-gun homicide rate is as high as some European countries' total homicide rate

The problem is our society.

You want to see gun murders drop sharply? You want to see overall murders drop sharply? Immediately?



Stop the war on drugs.


This would be much more effective and much faster than any gun law I can think of.

[SteveM]

58. Which "great country" are you king of? nt

[aikoaiko]

68. Sorry, but I don't click on suspicious blind links. Post it in this thread for a comment.

:shrug: