Domestic Murder and Suicide in PA

[mikeb302000]

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/local-news/2011/aug/28/14/va-soldier-large-phila-area-after-4-deaths-ar-1270209/">The Richmond Times Dispatch reports

Leonard John Egland, 37, a logistics officer at the sprawling military base south of Richmond, is believed to have killed his former wife, her boyfriend and his young son at a house in Chesterfield as well as his former mother-in-law, Barbara Reuhl, 66, in Bucks County, Pa., police said Sunday.

The soldier later committed suicide, authorities said.

The Virginia victims were not immediately identified.

This story touches on several of our favorite topics. Mental health screening and periodic check-ups should be a must for anyone who owns guns. It wouldn't identify ALL the problems, but some, don't you think.

And, of course, the problem of domestic abuse is one of our other favorites. Many of these guys could be screened out through the mental health check, but stricter standards must be enforced for disarming abusers. Wouldn't it seem reasonable to assume that guys who kill their ex-wives are not first-time offenders? Don't you think in many cases there's violence or the threat of violence present before the divorce? With stricter standards, some of these dangerous guys can be disarmed too.

It's easy to see that the more gun-friendly a place is, the less they're interested in solving this problem. http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2009/07/guns-and-women.html">There are statistics to prove that.

Gun-rights folks often say the gun isn't the problem. My response is that's true. The problem is violence or rage or misogyny or some other mental health issue. But the availability of guns is like the gasoline you throw on a fire. And since the access to guns is something that can be effected with proper controls, that's what I'm suggesting, not as opposed to addressing all those other problems, but in addition to those efforts.

Is that clear? Please tell us your opinion. Leave a comment.
http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/">(cross posted at Mikeb302000)

[Ruby the Liberal]

1. But, this guy was a "highly trained" military officer

doesn't that give them carte blanc?

[iverglas]

4. doesn't that give them carte blanc?

Does it? To do what?

I'm not catching your drift ...

You mean supposedly he was good to go with guns but that turned out to be a mistake? I'd agree with that.



A handgun and a semi-automatic rifle, and indeed, the rifle was used to shoot at the cops. Huh.

[gejohnston]

2. our favorite topics?

maybe yours and one I seriously doubt you know anything about. If this guy did kill these people, it seems to all about PTSD and nothing about misogyny or anything else. There is no evidence that he was an abuser based on the article.
It is also a federal crime for convicted abusers to possess firearms and their guns are confiscated. If they are caught with one, mandatory mim. of five years in the federal pen just like felons regardless of the crime. Yes Martha Stewart, that means you too. How much stricter can you get?

It's easy to see that the more gun-friendly a place is, the less they're interested in solving this problem.
That is absolute bullshit. I have no idea where you got the chart from, but how about all weapons in all jurisdictions?

[mikeb302000]

3. he killed his ex-wife for christ's sake

you say no evidence of abuse. What's wrong with you? Are you so determined to resist any taint on the gun availability that you say nonsense like that?

The chart which you say is bullshit comes from a book by a well-respected author. You should give it a look and put down the Lott and Kleck propaganda you've been reading.

[gejohnston]

7. first

Kleck is a well respected criminologist. Who is this well respected author? L. Ron Hubbard is well respected in some circles.
evidence of abuse before hand. The evidence of PTSD is stronger, based on the article.

[ileus]

5. Don't try suicide...

[Pab Sungenis]

6. This is more an indictment of

poor mental care for our returning veterans than of guns.

[Remmah2]

8. +1

nuff said

[Remmah2]

9. "Mental health screening and periodic check-ups should be a must"

For everyone, otherwise the practice would be discriminatory.

Domestic abuse, murder and suicide most certainly occur with multiple options as to the source of physical violence.

[Atypical Liberal]

10. Mental health examinations are a no-go.

I have no problem with being disqualified to own firearms because of certain mental conditions. People with those disqualifying conditions should be submitted to the NICS database so that they are bounced when they attempt to buy a firearm or obtain an FOID.

But requiring any kind of test before buying a firearm is a non-starter.

First of all, any such requirement involves government oversight and thus creates a registry of firearm owners. This is unacceptable.

Secondly, it creates an intolerable delay in purchasing firearms. Today, I can walk into a gun store and walk out with a firearm in 15 minutes. NICS checks are virtually instantaneous for most people. It is not acceptable to force people to wait a week or more to pay for a mental health examination before buying firearms.

NICS works just fine. If you want to add additional offenses to the NICS registry, through due process of law, I'm open to discussion.

[mikeb302000]

19. you misunderstood

the registry is a must, so is licensing of all gun owners, which is where the mental health examination would take place.

[gejohnston]

21. New Zealand scrapped registration years ago

after law enforcement lobbied parliament to get rid of it. The Netherlands do not even look at mental health records when issuing licenses because the police do not have access to them.
How about Italy? If not, have you contacted your MP?

[Atypical Liberal]

23. Not going to happen.

I will never comply with any attempt to register firearms, not comply with any licensing scheme that does not preserve firearm ownership anonymity.

The compromise I am willing to make is an FOID licensing scheme like Illinois has, with the difference being that it must be opt-out rather than opt-in.

In this way, every legal firearm owner is licensed, and has gone through a background check.

In return for this compromise anyone with an FOID should be able to buy firearms through the mail again without having to go through an FFL. Since FFL transfers are only in place to facilitate background checks, and this will already be done as a prerequisite of getting an FOID, this should not be a problem.

[AtheistCrusader]

11. lautenberg amendment.

Not surprised you are ignorant of it.

[MicaelS]

12. With people of your mindset making the laws

About mental health screening and periodic checkups? Not just no, but FUCK no.

[SteveM]

13. "Mental health screening:" Where hobgoblins of fear get all sciency...

In the history of this forum all manner of "mental health screening" has been proposed as a way to "condition" one's Second Amendment rights. They all have one aim: To allow the oft-abused "science" of psychology to become the tap with which to turn-off firearms access. That's why we have due process, and that's why we have National Instant Criminal background Check System which demands that one's mental competency be adjudicated and reported.

If we can use some contrived "mental health screening" for the Second, we might conceivably, just conceivably, have literacy tests in order to exercise our right to vote. Why, it's even possible such literacy screening could be abused.

[mikeb302000]

20. that's paranoid nonsense

the only considerationis to prevent the worst mental cases from owning guns legally. That can be done with little interference to your rights.

[Atypical Liberal]

25. In fact it is already done.

that's paranoid nonsense the only considerationis to prevent the worst mental cases from owning guns legally. That can be done with little interference to your rights.

First of all, there is nothing paranoid about noting how literacy tests have been used to restrict voting rights in the past, and how similar tests to exercise other Constitutional rights could likewise be abused.

Second of all, we already screen to prevent the worst mental cases from owning guns legally, through NICS.

[Atypical Liberal]

24. Exactly. n/t

[SteveM]

14. "...rock's flirtation with West Coast jazz in the mid-sixties is significant and often overl..."

[petronius]

16. Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter

;)

[rrneck]

15. Hey, pay attention.

Consider the ramifications of your jaundiced opinion.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry

[rl6214]

17. Thank you Dan Rather

I hadn't had the chance to see the news yet today.

[Glassunion]

18. But if we take away my wife's gun

How would she bust a cap in my ass when I have a "problem {with} violence or rage or misogyny or some other mental health issue"?

[ileus]

22. Should have shot himself first.