On May 20, 1988 Laurie Dann walked into Hubbard Woods Elementary School and shot five children, killing one and wounding four others. One of those wounded succumbed later. That wasn’t on the South Side of Chicago. It was in Hubbard Woods on the North Shore—one of the richest places in the state.
Since that day no schoolchild in any school anywhere in the United States could feel safe.
In the aftermath of the horrific murders in an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas there is an enormous amount of breast-beating, pontificating, and bloviating going on. I don’t object to limitations on gun ownership. If you believe that even a total ban on private ownership of firearms would prevent events like the one that happened in Texas from occurring again, it is incumbent on you to explain how any law can prevent people from using guns possessed illegally from using them illegally.
On December 14, 2012 Adam Lanza walked into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut and shot and killed 26 people. Newtown wasn’t in inner city Newark. It was and is a prosperous community.
What do Laurie Dann, Adam Lanza, and Salvador Ramos, the perpetrator of the Uvalde shooting, have in common? They had guns but that wasn’t all. There had been copious warning signs in both the cases of Laurie Dann and Adam Lanza and they were both seriously mentally ill. I have little doubt that the same will be found regarding Salvador Ramos.
Both Laurie Dann and Adam Lanza took their own lives. It has been pointed out by thinkers throughout the ages that suicide is the ultimate evil, an attack on the whole world, destroying the world as it were. I don’t believe that “suicide by cop” is any different and the murder of innocents certainly demonstrates an inclination towards violence, destroying the world.
I hope the demands for action following the murders in Uvalde don’t start and stop with gun control. I hope they extend to thinking differently about mental illness and, in particular, turn to “red flag laws”. In his reaction piece to the murders David French calls for enacting such laws:
I know the objections. I know that red flag laws implicate a core constitutional right. I also know that poorly drafted laws are subject to abuse. But our constitutional structure permits emergency and temporary deprivations of even core liberty interests upon sufficient showing of need, with sufficient due process. Restraining orders and other forms of domestic violence prevention orders can often block parents and spouses even from their own families upon a showing of imminent threat.
I don’t yet know the identity, history, or motivations of the Uvalde shooter. A red flag law may not have helped, but this dreadful moment should remind us of all the dreadful moments that came before. It should remind us that there is a policy that can save lives. Dear legislatures, pass red flag laws. Now. Give families and police a chance to remove guns from the people who tell us they’re dangerous.
In his reaction piece Alex Pareene laments:
Anyway, 19 little kids are dead, and I don’t expect anything meaningful will be done to prevent the next 19 little kids from getting killed. I know most of the complex logistical, legal, cultural, and political reasons why our system is incapable of preventing this. I leave those explanations to other authors. I ask instead what anyone with power in this country—a group that has intentionally excluded young people from its ranks—plans to do about those reasons. And I invite the reader to think about the implications of the fact that those people with power cannot answer my question with anything remotely credible. What are you going to do about the fact that we all know you can’t do anything?
I think there’s one more thing that we need to do. We need to reduce the amount of anger that’s out there. One of the ways of doing that is by dialing down the level of anger in our discourse. I’m open to other suggestions but as anger rises more generally I think we will inevitably see more lashing out.
I’m not sure what these Red Flag Orders are doing that existing protective orders are there for. They appear to target the gun for confiscation, so maybe more specific authority for seizing firearms is necessary given Second Amendment developments. But it still seems like it alludes the mental health issue by making it a gun issue.
I also don’t think the reference to the Virginia Tech shooting in French’s piece is accurate. I think fellow students spotted some red flags, reported the shooter to the school, which got a temporary detention order from a court that would permit a professional to observe him. The professional did not find evidence to keep him in custody, presumably because he denied anything was wrong. French says gun control laws are unlikely to stop mass shooting events because they are “meticulously planned” so they can evade them, but they can’t deny they are suicidal?
In any event, its probably good for people to have better knowledge of red flags and maybe education about available support. I think its mostly going to be up the subject of the intervention to acknowledge the need for help.
Illinois just passed a law banning ghost guns made with 3d printers or online parts. Apparently, the number of ghost guns confiscated in gun violence incidents is doubling every year. Is there any possibility that this law has any teeth? Do any handgun restrictions have any teeth given today’s technology?
Our policies toward the mentally ill are total failures. They especially fail the ill themselves. A generation ago, for no good reason, or maybe no reason at all, we closed all our psychiatric hospitals and turned the patients out into the streets, where they remain. We also enacted a number of laws that make it nearly impossible to treat the mentally ill against their will, regardless of their condition. They have to be in the middle of suicide attempts or murder for intervention to occur.
I do not doubt Ramos is mad. I also believe that this incident will change nothing. Later this year, or next year, or the year after, another mass school shooting will happen, to the usual pointless hand-wringing.
PS. The score in Chicago this weekend past was one dead, 31 wounded. Nobody cares. It didn’t even make the nightly news. You have to trawl the depths of the internet to learn about it.
Are the gang bangers who shot down all those people in Chicago as mad as Ramos?
“The score in Chicago this weekend past was one dead, 31 wounded. Nobody cares. It didn’t even make the nightly news.”
No political ore to be mined there. But it only took 90 – 120 seconds for our pathetic excuse for a President to crassly go mining for a gun control solution, hackneyed as the discussion is.
I doubt they’ll ban 3d printers or machine parts so the law is virtue-signalling.
Probably not but people know. That’s the commonality between Laurie Dann, Adam Lanza, and, I believe, Salvador Ramos. Family, friends, classmates, even the police are aware that they have serious issues and turn a blind eye or even enable them.
Tighter gun control won’t end the carnage in Chicago. It will continue until the friends, family, etc. of those doing the shooting start turning them in.
This is all hand waving to make the hand wavers feel good about themselves.
By the end of the year, over 19 children in New Orleans will have been killed, and many more shot. Almost all of them will be poor/lower income black kids, but their Black Lives DO NOT Matter. I have no doubt larger cities are even worse.
(New Orleans is like the Wild, Wild West, but a lot of this is feuding between the Hatfields & McCoys.)
Increasing the penalties for seeking help for mental health will decrease the number of people seeking help. Personally, I know that good mental health support can change one’s life, and I have learned that it comes at a price. I now advise people to be very careful about seeking help.
Because I try to be honest, the VA knows that I own several weapons, and given the opportunity, they would confiscate the, immediately. As it is, I am on the government dole because I asked for help. I should have gone with Plan A, but I did not understand that I would get a scarlet letter.
I would suggest you all think long and hard about adding more penalties for mental illness.
@Tasty, I share the concern about undermining mental health treatment. One of the red flags for the Virginia Tech shooter I disagree with is that as a child he was diagnosed and treated for depression and selective mutism (severe social anxiety). Neither of those diagnosis mean a person is “dangerous to themselves or others.” That should be the operative standard where restrictions might be imposed, not simply having seen a therapist, taken a drug used in psychotherapy (regardless of the actual reason for its use), or having any diagnosis without input from the person providing the diagnosis. The French article didn’t seem to draw those distinctions.
“One of the ways of doing that is by dialing down the level of anger in our discourse.”
I see that Beto O’Rourke joined Biden among the grave dancers for political gain.
A am with Tasty’s fundamental point about mental health. The politicians have already headed down the useless path of gun control debates. But spiritual, cultural or mental health issues do not lend themselves to debates about inanimate objects. Most drugs are illegal. But they are on the street. So it is with guns.
I wish the debate would move towards behavioral issues, and hardening targets. But then politicians lose an issue. The lousy fucks.
“or maybe no reason at all, we closed all our psychiatric hospitals and turned the patients out into the streets, where they remain.â€
The reason was litigation by absent family against the state run institutions for the developmentally disabled and mentally handicapped.
So they washed their hands of them.
A few dead kids is just the price we pay for having guns.
Hardening targets? LOL
Steve
Better phrasing.
https://twitter.com/theothernina/status/1529621595899166720