by WildRose » Sun 16 Dec 2012, 04:36:36
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', 'L')ack of gun control plus mental illness.
I'd agree with that.
But let's examine this case a little further -
The shooter was 20 years old, lived with his mother (who was a teacher), was a prior student at the same school (so would have been known in the community), was estranged from his brother - they hadn't been in contact for a couple years, and the parents were divorced. The family was affluent and well-educated.
So...could they not afford mental health care? Were they not aware their son needed mental health care? Were they embarrassed? In denial? Who obtained the guns, and why? I read somewhere that the shooter tried to purchase another gun a few days before the rampage.
Remember Columbine - the two shooters were young, they were "outsiders", they had amassed weapons and ammunition and their parents were apparently oblivious to the fact. They were also from affluent families, could they not afford mental health care or be aware that it was needed?
So many facets to cases like these.
But, there are people making big, big money on gun sales, and I believe the "freedom" to purchase all manner of guns will be protected for that reason, mostly.
In what kinds of circumstances are people in the US killed by guns? How many are gunned down in home invasions? (Compare that to the need to have guns to protect your family and property.) I'm willing to bet a large number of the gun deaths are similar to those that occur in Canada, that is, related to gang and drug activity. How often are innocent people killed in the cross-fire (there's always that chance, but how often does it happen, really?)
It seems in recent years that there's been an uptick in the number of deaths caused by shooters on rampages. Lack of gun control and mental illness are surely to blame, along with rage and glorification of guns - now how to fix it?