In your initial post you say, "With roughly 2 million households in America having both guns and seriously mentally ill folks, mass shootings are certain to occur with regularity." Then in your reply to my comment you state, "Sane people both under stress and for profit are the primary cause of violence. That doesn't make the seriously mentally ill a scapegoat." So how is you saying that with mentally ill people having guns in their homes is not a scapegoat to the cause... And then you also add the word "seriously". This changes the entire aspect of the conversation. There are millions of people who live with dissabilities every day. Then you throw "seriously disabled" into the mix and the story changes.
I'm not saying that both sane and insane (according to society) are not both issues for gun violence. What I'm getting at is the media focus on the Sandy Hook shooting was that the person that did the shootings was mentally handicapped. This has been the focus of most of the conversations about bans has been directed at and using mental handicaps as the scapegoat.
I don't see why everyone is focussing on the mental health aspect of this whole situation. Every day people who are perfectly sane, in the eyes of the masses, go through several stages of depression and highs. On any one given day a perfectly sane person can snap and go through the roof and shoot everyone around them... The key here is not the mental capacity of the person, it's the scapegoat. Mass shootings, and shootings in general, is becoming the new "cool" thing for people to do. It's a way for someone to devastate a large amount of other people and then take themselves out as well so they don't have to suffer.
Why is this being limited to domestic assault? I would think they would have arrested him with charges of attempted murder.
I think it's great that they are utilizing the tech school program to give the students real life experience in their field of study.
I don't understand the decision making process here. You have a man that will soon be facing criminal charges of stalking and damaging the property of a former girlfriend...
So letting him out on bail from just the money he currently had in his wallet is smart how? I hope there is some sort of restraining order to go along with this, not that it seems like he would care.
"Because mental illness has been at the root of many of these recent shooting tragedies"
Don't use mental illness as a scapegoat for bad parenting.
How many times did the store on the corner of Route 4 in Jay right across from the fire station get burned down for insurance money... They were never able to pin it on that guy though.
So if a person that works shift work (which I do) want's to have a beer at 0500 after a long nigts work they can go ahead and do just that. If they have alcohol in their refridgerator they can have a drink as soon as they get home.
Why do we need for people to be able to buy alcohol at 0500 anyway? All I can see coming out of this is more DUI's at early morning times...
So what questions does this answer. I know it's a news story and there is more development to come, but the time frames aren't quite matching up.
Fired/relieved- 10 Jan
Max appeal time- 21 Jan
Max response time- 4 Feb
Max response to response- 18 Feb
If the person in question is actually being fired/relieved of duty then why keep them on the payroll? Why not put them on unpaid leave or equivalent?
I think it's great that they are taking steps to assist in protecting the babies. In other areas, even when it's not flu season, there are no children under 12 allowed in the maternity ward unless it's a sibling. And if they have the sniffles they are not allowed in at all.