Multiple Sources: Multiple shot including Congress Woman

[twa]

Come on -

His BLOG (Which is what it was - not a article for the newspaper he works for) cites ZERO sources for this.

Meanwhile -It would lay the blame at the sheriff - who has angered most Conservatives by saying that he thinks the chatter on the right has lead to this and the only person who has reported this is somoene who is working activly for conservative causes?

Doesn't pass the laugh test.

You want sources for the punk making previous death threats?....will the sheriff himself do?

the allegation of deputies convincing people not to file charges is the only new info there

[Predicto]

I know some on this board aren't going to want to hear this but does it seem given, yesterday and todays revelations and media take, that those who jumped and tried to lay this crime at the Tea Parties, Palin's, Conservative rhetoric, or Arizona's doorstep seem to have had this quickly boomerang on them? Seems like Krugman, Dupnik and others are getting evicerated today for their conduct and reactions to this event.

I think that it is inevitable that people will speculate when anything like this happens, and then the people who feel like they are being unfairly attacked by the speculation will lash back, and so on. Sadly, that's the 24 hour news cycle at work.

And while blaiming this on Palin or even the Tea Parties seems out of line, I'm not 100 percent sure that "conservative rhetoric" is completly out of the blame woods on this one. I, for one, am "keeping my powder dry" on that one.

---------- Post added January-10th-2011 at 05:26 PM ----------

Also, I think it's a great idea to tell people that everything the other party does is a secret plan to take away their liberty and property, and we are rapidly approaching irreversible change in America, and unless we take decisive action NOW our children and grandchildren will suffer the consequences of our failure to act.

Keep your powder dry. Molon Labe. Psalm 109:8. Remember Waco. Obama's Plan: White Slavery. The American Taxpayers are the Jews for Obama's Ovens. And so on.

The Tea Parties are peaceful, but like any large political movement, they often don't do a very good job weeding out the whackos from associating with their movement.

[Stadium-Armory]

More food for thought on the second amendment angle. Much of it is a retread of what we've already discussed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-horwitz/tucson-shows-the-true-fac_b_806594.html

Tucson Shooting Shows True Face of NRA's "Second Amendment Remedies"

"Our democracy is a light, a beacon really, around the world because we affect change at the ballot box and not because of these outbursts of violence." ~ U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, March 25, 2010

We can describe Saturday's shooting rampage in Tucson as shocking, horrifying, and unthinkable; but no one -- no elected official, no media commentator, no opinion maker -- can truthfully say it was a surprise. It was not an isolated act, nor was it an aberration. Instead it was the latest tragic incident in a purposely-designed effort to inject violence into our political process.

This embrace of political violence has been part of far right wing ideology for decades, but was tamped down after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. It began to reemerge in 2008 with the Supreme Court's landmark Second Amendment decision in D.C. v. Heller. In that 5-4 ruling, Justice Scalia overturned 200+ years of jurisprudence and parroted the National Rifle Association's radical view of the Second Amendment, writing, "If... the Second Amendment right is no more than the right to keep and use weapons as a member of an organized militia... if, that is, the organized militia is the sole institutional beneficiary of the Second Amendment's guarantee -- it does not assure the existence of a 'citizens' militia' as a safeguard against tyranny."

This radical idea -- which completely ignores our Founders' tough response to armed insurrectionists during Shays' Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion -- flowered even further after the election of our first African American president in November 2008. It started with rhetoric (i.e., NRA leader Wayne LaPierre telling CPAC "the guys with the guns make the rules" in March 2009), then slowly devolved into petty violence (i.e., militia leader Mike Vanderboegh blogging, "To all modern Sons of Liberty... Break their windows. Break them NOW," after the health care vote in March 2010), then more serious violence (i.e., the stomping of Lauren Valle at a Rand Paul rally in October 2010, the planned attack on the Tides Foundation that was stopped in a shootout on I-580 in California), and now political murder.

It is the culmination of anti-democratic slogans like "Trigger the Vote," "It is time to water the tree of liberty," "Gather your armies," and "If ballots don't work, bullets will." It started years ago in gun shows and isolated corners of the Internet, but has been amplified and "mainstreamed" by the NRA and the likes of Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Sharron Angle, and Michelle Bachmann. It was celebrated during Open Carry rallies across the country on April 19, 2010, including one across the river from the U.S. Capitol where protesters came to "step up to the edge" to "show [their] elected servants in DC and the state capitals that [they] will not stand by idly while their corruption, dishonesty, and outright violations of our country's founding principles destroy the American Republic." It is something that I predicted in my 2009 book, Guns, Democracy and the Insurrectionist Idea, and that we at the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence have been documenting on a weekly basis in our "Insurrectionism Timeline."

Indeed, it is no surprise that a mentally ill young man embraced this ideology, authoring deranged anti-government screeds like, "You don't have to accept the federalist laws... Read the United States of America's Constitution to apprehend all of the current treasonous laws." Or musing publicly, "I don't feel good: I'm ready to kill a police officer! I can say it." As Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik noted, "When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government... That may be free speech, but it's not without consequences."

Loughner's target in the shooting, U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), was well aware that rhetoric could inspire violence. After her Tucson office was vandalized following her vote for health care reform in March 2010, she told MSNBC, "I think it's important for all leaders, not just leaders of the Republican Party or the Democratic Party... but community leaders... to say 'look, we can't stand for this.' This is a situation where they really need to realize that the rhetoric and firing people up and, you know, even things, for example, we're on Sarah Palin's targeted list. But the thing is that the way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gun sight over our district. And when people do that, they've gotta' realize there's consequences to that action... I can say... that in the years that some of my colleagues have served -- 20, 30 years -- they've never seen it like this." She undoubtedly was again concerned when her opponent in the 2010 elections invited supporters to "Get on Target for Victory in November. Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office. Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly."

Saturday wasn't even the first time that Rep. Giffords came face to face with a gun at a political event. In August 2009, at another one of her meet-and-greet events at a supermarket, a man with a "Don't Tread on Me" banner dropped a loaded, concealed handgun to the floor during an angry debate, spurring Giffords' staff to call police to the event.

Nor can we express surprise that an American who was clearly deranged was able to purchase two handguns and a high-capacity magazine from a Tucson gun store. There was no shortage of red flags in Jared Lee Loughner's background. In October 2007, he was cited by the Pima County Sheriff's Department for possession of drug paraphernalia. One year later, he faced a "local charge" in Marana Municipal Court. He was rejected when he tried to enlist in the U.S. Army after failing a drug test. Classmates of Loughner at Pima Community College described him as "obviously very disturbed" and a "troubled young man." One student recalled, "No one in... class would even sit next to him." Pima Community College suspended Loughner for conduct violations and he withdrew from the college in October 2010 after five instances of classroom or library disruptions that involved the campus police. The college sent a letter to Loughner's parents stating that if he wished to return to the school, he would have to "obtain a mental health clearance indicating, in the opinion of a mental health professional, his presence at the College does not present a danger to himself or others." If that wasn't enough, Loughner announced publicly on his MySpace page last month that he was ready to kill.

Yet in the NRA's America, Loughner was a "law-abiding citizen" and a legal gun purchaser. He passed an instant computerized background check at the Sportsman's Warehouse on November 30, 2010, which probably only took a few minutes. He was not a prohibited purchaser under the very narrow federal disqualifications for mental health -- Loughner had never been involuntarily committed to a psychiatric institution nor adjudicated as a "mental defective" by a court. And because there was no waiting period or actual background investigation of Loughner, none of his well-known psychiatric problems were looked at. Sadly, even had he failed a background check he could have purchased his guns from a "private seller" without undergoing a background check in more than 40 states, including Arizona. It's that easy. Arizona, which has some of the weakest gun laws in the country, even allows residents to carry loaded handguns in public without a permit (and therefore without any type of screening). Finally, the NRA, by successfully lobbying against the renewal of the federal Assault Weapons Ban (1994-2004), even made sure that Loughner would have access to high-capacity ammunition magazines (greater than 10 rounds) -- in this case a 33-round clip which he used to devastating effect in Tucson.

To say that America's gun laws facilitated these murders, therefore, would be an understatement.

So now we see what a "Second Amendment remedy" looks like in practice. As a consequence, we have lost federal judge John M. Roll, 63; Gabriel Zimmerman, 30; Dorothy Morris, 76; Dorwin Stoddard, 76; Phyllis Schneck, 79; and, most tragically, nine-year-old Christina-Taylor Green, who went to Safeway on Saturday to learn more about government and public service. Fourteen others lie wounded with their lives torn apart, including Rep. Giffords.

Our democracy has also suffered a tremendous blow. Once again, an individual has decided for himself that our government is "tyrannical," thereby depriving the rest of us of our most basic rights as Americans. It's long past time that we remembered that health care reform and financial regulation are policy choices to be debated, not declarations of civil war.

If our leaders -- of all political persuasions -- once again fail to find their voices and speak out in no uncertain terms against insurrectionist ideology and the weak gun laws that routinely arm America's deranged and disgruntled, then Tucson will mark the beginning, and not the end, of America's flirtation with anarchy.

[twa]

More food for thought...ya actually think that dweeb cared about the second amendment?

Gifford did

[JimboDaMan]

With all the red flags being report about this kid why is this?? The ol sheriff might be in a bit of hot water. Sheriff has admitted to knowing about prior "recent" death threats, behavior issues at the college where a mental health examination was required for re-entry and classified this guy as unstable etc.

Despite mounting concerns about his bizarre and disturbing behavior, local mental health authorities in Pima County, Ariz. said Monday that no one reported any concerns to them about Tucson mass shooting suspect Jared Lee Loughner.........

Snip....."To the best of our knowledge, he was never and is currently not enrolled in our system," said Neal Cash, president of the Community Partnership of Southern Arizona, the organization that provides mental health services to Tucson and Pima County for the state.

continues.....http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2011/01/jared-loughners-behavior-never.html

In your estimation, what grounds were there for the sheriff to legally detain the guy? What disqualified him from purchasing a weapon? What is it the sheriff did or did not do where he failed in his duty?

---------- Post added January-10th-2011 at 06:50 PM ----------

More food for thought...ya actually think that dweeb cared about the second amendment?

Gifford did

I believe his thoughts on the second amendment are 100% irrelevant. But seeing as that was the thing that allowed him to buy his weapons and become instantly famous, yeah, I'm thinking he likes that amendment.

[lovetoaster]

In your estimation, what grounds were there for the sheriff to legally detain the guy? What disqualified him from purchasing a weapon? What is it the sheriff did or did not do where he failed in his duty?

Charges could have been filed for making death threats, especially if they were on multiple occasions. Now of course those charges have to be pursued by the person that they may have been directed to, but if (and I emphasize if) they were discouraged in pressing charges, that is obviously not good. It appears that someone really overlooked something here, whether it was the sheriff or not.

[Koala]

And whenever something like this happens and people say "what's wrong with our country? what could we do to try and find the root causes of such things?"

Someone else comes along and says "Nothing's wrong. Crazy people are to blame"

~Bang

You can do better than that

Psychologically, it is not usually society's fault when people internalize and personalize a general public issue such as politics. It usually has more to do with some sort of psychosis, some mental disorder. Which, again, is more likely genetically influencly and societally-enabled than it is simply societies fault.

[aREDSKIN]

In your estimation, what grounds were there for the sheriff to legally detain the guy? What disqualified him from purchasing a weapon? What is it the sheriff did or did not do where he failed in his duty?

---------- Post added January-10th-2011 at 06:50 PM ----------

I believe his thoughts on the second amendment are 100% irrelevant. But seeing as that was the thing that allowed him to buy his weapons and become instantly famous, yeah, I'm thinking he likes that amendment.

The sheriff failed to do so apparently. No felony record or state mental records allowed him being able to buy a gun. College required a mental heal eval before re admittance. Sheriff admittedly has access to all of this and the guy was well know tho the dept. Seems pretty cut & dry to me. Only time will tell.

From the above link- "Unlike other states, which require that someone be an imminent danger to themselves or others before seeking to have them involuntarily committed for psychiatric evaluation and treatment, in Arizona, one need only be "persistently or acutely" ill.

[twa]

In your estimation, what grounds were there for the sheriff to legally detain the guy? What disqualified him from purchasing a weapon? What is it the sheriff did or did not do where he failed in his duty?

.

He didn't need to detain him(though making multiple death threats would warrant it)

, in Arizona any individual can petition the court to force a mental evaluation if they feel someone is mentally ill or a threat (a rather odd State)

If he was making death threats ,along with his bizarre behavior,and apparently not under psychiatric care already ya think patting him on the head and sending him out the door was appropriate?

[Predicto]

Imagine Drudge.

"Breaking - Sheriff puts innocent sovereign citizen in mental hospital for expressing political opposition to Democrat Congresswoman. Attempts to deny Second Amendment rights. Are FEMA deathcamps next? Stay tuned..."

[JimboDaMan]

Charges could have been filed for making death threats, especially if they were on multiple occasions. Now of course those charges have to be pursued by the person that they may have been directed to, but if (and I emphasize if) they were discouraged in pressing charges, that is obviously not good. It appears that someone really overlooked something here, whether it was the sheriff or not.

Pretty big stretch for making harrassing phone calls. Without actually carrying out threats it would be nearly impossible to charge him with anything that would forfeit his legal right to own weapons. Maybe they could have gotten a restraining order, if any of the threat recipients pursued the issue. That would certainly have averted this tragedy because I'm sure he would have obeyed it, right?

[Stadium-Armory]

Ok folks, its about time to move over to the stadium for some fun in the Cam Newton thread.

[JimboDaMan]

He didn't need to detain him(though making multiple death threats would warrant it)

, in Arizona any individual can petition the court to force a mental evaluation if they feel someone is mentally ill or a threat (a rather odd State)

If he was making death threats ,along with his bizarre behavior,and apparently not under psychiatric care already ya think patting him on the head and sending him out the door was appropriate?

What Predicto said. I'm sure you'd support locking up every gun nut who allegedly made threatening phone calls. Unless and until he did something violent it's extremely rare to go that route.

[lovetoaster]

Pretty big stretch for making harrassing phone calls. Without actually carrying out threats it would be nearly impossible to charge him with anything that would forfeit his legal right to own weapons. Maybe they could have gotten a restraining order, if any of the threat recipients pursued the issue. That would certainly have averted this tragedy because I'm sure he would have obeyed it, right?

I'll admit, I am not as on top of this story as much as others here, but I had heard "death threats" referenced. If they were just harassing phone calls then that is obviously a different story. It certainly seems like there were signs that were missed, although it always seems that way in retrospect.

[Burgold]

Hindsight is always really tough.

It's why I don't give a lot of credence to those people who say after the fact that 9/11 could have been prevented because we had so many of the jigsaw pieces in hand.

[EersSkins05]

Actually, I'm going to go way, way, off in theory-land, here. But I think a logical case could be made tha maybe we, as a society, would be better off if we never found out what the murderer's motive was. Especially if this was what I think of as a "publicity killing".

For one thing, by putting the murderer's manifesto into the news cycle, you're giving every person who has a manifesto, a way to get it published.

For another, in the case of terrorists, (people attempting to alter public actions through violence), publishing their statements is handing them the tool that they want: A tool with which to attempt to change society. (Even if society's reaction to terrorism is to do the opposite of what the terrorist says, you're still permitting the terrorist to manipulate you.)

----------

Now, I'm not certain that I'm as logical as that above argument. I'll admit to wanting to know what the guy claims his motive was.

Just pointing out that finding out his motive, and publicizing it, is a two-edged sword.

I've been thinking this ever since the news broke.

There's got to be a better way of covering these incidents than mass publicity and scrutiny of some mope's whacked-out manifesto. I guess on some level it helps to better identify potential threats to know why the threat existed in the first place (how many more kids that were picked on and potentially violent were identified after the Columbine shooters' motives were publicized?), but I still hate the feeling of giving these nutjobs precisely the platform they were seeking when they committed the act in the first place.

[NavyDave]

What Predicto said. I'm sure you'd support locking up every gun nut who allegedly made threatening phone calls. Unless and until he did something violent it's extremely rare to go that route.

Do they also lose the right to vote? That might upset the party who is in favor of convicted felons voting.

[JimboDaMan]

I'll admit, I am not as on top of this story as much as others here, but I had heard "death threats" referenced. If they were just harassing phone calls then that is obviously a different story. It certainly seems like there were signs that were missed, although it always seems that way in retrospect.

The death threat stuff comes primarily from one guy's blog. A blog that includes this kind of stuff in the comments section:

"This excuse for a Sheriff needs to resign. He is a disgrace to use this shooting for political gain.

He should be thrown on Sheriff Joe Arapio’s chain gang and made to wear a pink uniform to match his cowardice soul. What a complete disgrace this thug is.

There is a rumor going around that he is the Grandfather of Loughtner, but have not been able to verify.

Another word press blogger has nailed Obama’s illegal soul. It shows our usurper stirring trouble up pre and post illegal Presidency. What a complete thug. All of these liberal/progressive/Communists are thugs and liars."

So the source is somewhat suspect, amusingly being pushed by the same people who condemned the media for reporting the shooter was a veteran without finding out reliable facts first. But if you take it as accurate there's still no indication the threat recipients pursued things. I don't know this sheriff from Adam, and in hindsight it sure would have been great if he locked Loughner up and threw away the key, but I think this condemnation of him comes from people angry that he stupidly connected this crime to right-wing rhetoric.

[Renegade7]

If this guy made these kinda threats towards Obama, he'd be in jail already one way or another. So, why did people in charge of protecting Gifford do nothing? Gifford knew, how come no one did anything about this guy? Problem is no one wants to take responsibility for knowing that this guy was crazy, so I don't expect whoever sold him the gun to know from some sorta database that he shouldn't be sold a gun; this is not 2nd amendments fault.

At this rate, I guess we're going to have to wait till somebody with a PhD kills somebody on congress before we can have an adult discussion about the way large swathes of the right ARE instigating the American public.

Everything is wrong, so now what?

[NavyDave]

Well I see I was correct with the left wing media and certain politicians on the left being wrong about blaming Palin and talk radio as well as following it up with the violent hateful rhetoric (where is it?) on the right has to change.

I'm counting on the left on that push for new and improved gun control laws to be revisited soon instead of just enforcing what is on the books.

[fullnelson9999]

Do they also lose the right to vote? That might upset the party who is in favor of convicted felons voting.

Just stop it.

[twa]

What Predicto said. I'm sure you'd support locking up every gun nut who allegedly made threatening phone calls. Unless and until he did something violent it's extremely rare to go that route.

Multiple death threats?...I would have no problem at all locking them up and requiring a psych eval.

In my book ya get one for idiocy's sake,and even then it calls for closer scrutiny(which this character would obviously fail)

I know only too well not to ignore threats

[aREDSKIN]

What Predicto said. I'm sure you'd support locking up every gun nut who allegedly made threatening phone calls. Unless and until he did something violent it's extremely rare to go that route.

Um No. Yet again here is what Az allows when considering involuntary commitment. The sheriff alluded to more than one threat they were aware of.

From the above link- "Unlike other states, which require that someone be an imminent danger to themselves or others before seeking to have them involuntarily committed for psychiatric evaluation and treatment, in Arizona, one need only be "persistently or acutely" ill.

[Bang]

You can do better than that

Psychologically, it is not usually society's fault when people internalize and personalize a general public issue such as politics. It usually has more to do with some sort of psychosis, some mental disorder. Which, again, is more likely genetically influencly and societally-enabled than it is simply societies fault.

Of course it's his own ultimate responsibility.

And so long as we make sure that we tell ourselves that is ALL it is, then we don't have to examine anything that might actually cause us some discomfort.

Well, here we are again.

And every time we get to hear how no one at all bears any responsibility to their neighbors.

Just like we will next time.

And the time after that.

And the time after that.

etc.

etc.

~Etc

[Predicto]

Honestly, why is the right so surprised and outraged that many people's first assumption was that this guy who tried to murder a Democratic member of Congress was motivated in part by firey right wing rhetoric?

It's not as though that isn't actually happening in other cases around the country.

Byron Williams, the guy who came down from the California Sierras with the intention of killing everyone at the Tides Foundation in San Francisco (but got caught for reckless driving before he could get there)? His own mom said he was totally inspired by Glenn Beck, and Beck was the only media figure to include the Tides foundation in any big conspiracy nonsense.

James Von Brunn, the guy who shot up the Holocaust museum? A birther who posted on FreeRepublic.

Charles Alan Wilson, the guy who recently got jailed for explicit death threats against Democratic Senator Patty Murray? Motivated by Glenn Beck again.

A gas line leading to the house of the house of the brother of Democratic Congressman Tom Perriello was cut, after the brother's address was mistakenly listed on a Tea Party blog instead of the congressman's.

John Patrick Bedell, the guy who shot two cops at the Pentagon last year and Joseph Stack, the guy who flew his plane into the IRS building? Their views were all over the place, but both were angry antigovernment people who mouthed extreme versions of Tea Party rhetoric.

Democratic congressmen and Senators have been getting ever increasing death threats, bricks through their windows, white powder mailed to their offices, etc. People are showing up at political events brandishing weapons.

It may be true that people jumped to conclusions about this particular event. We shall see. But it is hardly surprising that they did, given the other recent incidents we know about.