But requiring it kind of seems like the "turn in your neighbor" mentality of Nazi Germany to me.

JMO.

Does that come from a Nazi Germany mentality?

Keeping assault weapons out of the hands of paranoid schizophrenics seems as important to me.

But I'm not aware of any law that requires the general public to do so. I can't imagine what kind of sicko WOULDN'T report such an atrocity, but I don't know that it's required.

Having said that, I'm not comfortable with the idea of us turning people in because they have strange messages on their answering machines or voice mails. Or because of the way they signed their e-mail. That's a pretty subjective criteria for reporting someone to the authorities, IMO.

who make profits from guns and are in a position to come into contact with crazies who collect weapons?

No.

Now, if he met him and still felt something was strange, then I would have expected him to report it.

If the voicemail was crazy enough to get him banned from the club, why shouldn't the club owner be required to report him?

From the link at the OP:

He emailed an application to join the Lead Valley Range in Byers on June 25 in which he said he was not a user of illegal drugs or a convicted felon, said owner Glenn Rotkovich. When Rotkovich called to invite him to a mandatory orientation the following week, he said he heard a message on Holmes' voice mail that was "bizarre - guttural, freakish at best."

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/22/4648754/police-colo-suspect-planned-massacre.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy

The club owner's policy was that he didn't admit anyone until he met the person and got to know them. He called a couple of times, got the weird message, but the Holmes never came in for the orientation visit.

That's different than being banned because of a voice message.

A lot of them. My ex's nephew had one last year imitating one of the guys from "Spinal Tap."

not going to happen. They are pretty much all of the same ilk,
and cover for each other, thanks to the murderous NRA sub-culture
of dangerously aggressive & hostile people.

Then the rules are different.

(Sorry for the snark; your opinion is that of a RATIONAL person, and unfortunately, we live in a country filled with "don't rock the boat" folks.)

We need to come up with answers.

Thanks.

The OP would have us acting as mental health experts and would require us to report someone we "suspect" is "disturbed" if they might own guns. Requiring... REQUIRING me to know and understand when someone is mentally disturbed and whether or not they own guns would mean I'd alert each and every time I heard an untoward statement made by one individual to another. After all, they MIGHT have guns, and if they DO, and I heard their statement, I'd be liable for whatever the REQUIREMENT might entail as punishment.

While I might not have the answer, I can tell you what's NOT the answer, and it's this suggestion.

IMHO, that's what is important--getting the dialogue started.

Open dialogue. Now there is something that wasn't allowed in the Soviet Union.

lack of understanding. It is an awful idea.

I like the idea of requiring gun owners to buy insurance for each gun they own. That would force the price of guns up and require annual renewal of the insurance. People would report lost or stolen guns if they had to verify that the still had the gun in order to buy insurance once a year.

And it would insure that the victims of gun violence are compensated for their injuries of all kinds. I suspect that the insurance would turn out to be very expensive.

If we distributed the cost of gun violence and accidents across all the guns in the US, gun owners might suddenly discover just how expensive that hobby really is.

No requirements at all that would impede him from buying an entire arsenal of guns, ammo, and explosives, even if you did report him to the authorities as batshit crazy.

We need gun laws in addition to mental health detection systems.

if he is deemed a threat to others.

If the gun club owner had reported him, and the situation was investigated, this tragedy perhaps could have been prevented.

But to report someone to the police based on a voice message and an e-mail signature? Sorry, I'm not in favor of mandating that.

Is there nothing that could be said on a voice message that you would think should be reported?

"I'm amassing guns and I'm going to kill a bunch of people", I would report him.
But gibberish and noises and nonsense? Sorry, but no.

My God.

A coworker of mine has voices for her dogs. She "talks" like them on the phone. Should she be reported for being delusional? She is a gun owner. Honest question: should I report her?

I just Googled.

If he had been placed into a mental hospital for observation, he wouldn't be able to get a handgun in CO.

What the heck is a "mental health detection system"? Some of these suggestions are really very disturbing in a free society.

for some time, the same kind of behavior that the gun club owner rejected him for.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-07-22/aurora-shooting-james-holmes/56422044/1

Forensic psychiatrists and mental health experts say that as authorities piece together the evidence and look into Holmes' behavior, there is a high likelihood that they'll start to see clues that his mind was unraveling.

"I don't know if this guy was mentally ill or if he was the epitome of evil," says Steven Pitt, a forensic psychiatrist who consulted on the 1999 Columbine shooting just miles from Aurora. "But I can promise you that as additional information comes out, a picture will be painted of a very disturbed individual even before he committed this act."

In some cases, mental health experts say, warning signs appear in a subject's fascination with guns or even a direct threat to kill people. A person might even isolate himself or appear delusional, they say. But experts emphasize that pinpointing when a person will explode in a wave of violence is a whole other matter.

]http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120723/NATION/207230323/


Holmes attempted to join a Byers gun club on June 25, but his behavior was deemed too bizarre for membership.

It wasn't Holmes' club application that raised a red flag for Lead Valley Range owner Glenn Rotkovich, but rather the outgoing message on his answering machine.

"It was this deep, guttural voice, rambling something incoherent," Rotkovich said. "I thought, 'What is this idiot trying to be?'"

Rotkovich said he told his employees Holmes was not allowed on the premises.

Could they at some point have picked up a phone and alerted someone which might have led to some sort of welfare check on this guy? Not much has been said about them yet and I wonder how much they knew.

They were probably told that since he wasn't an immediate danger to himself or others there was absolutely nothing any authorities could do about him.

That's how these things play out in the US. Families are helpless once a troubled person hits 18.

he might have been deemed an immediate threat to others. We'll never know.

enough to get even a 72-hour hold, let alone serious psychiatric care. Courts care not one bit if mentally ill people behave in ways that pose a danger to themselves or others until they are standing right in front of someone with a loaded gun, threatening them to their face. And often not even then. They care only after people are injured or dead.

as being a threat to himself, even though he wasn't standing there with a weapon. It does happen.

And there has to be history, or a report by a doctor treating the person.

And, it is VERY difficult to get a "5150 hold" on an adult.

The voicemail message is not proof of anything.

should have triggered some kind of investigation, in an ideal world.

And the article did say that the club owner instructed employees not to accept him.

"He left two other messages but eventually told his staff to watch out for Holmes at the July 1 orientation and not to accept him into the club, Rotkovich said."

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/22/4648754/police-colo-suspect-planned-massacre.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy

Sounds like it was related to a batman movie.
Which he appears to have been obsessed with.

to ban him from the club.

He left him messages. But Mr. Holmes never responded to these messages.
If it was so alarming, why leave several messages?

"He left two other messages but eventually told his staff to watch out for Holmes at the July 1 orientation and not to accept him into the club, Rotkovich said.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/22/4648754/police-colo-suspect-planned-massacre.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy

led to concerns that caused him to be banned.

Where the owner himself is telling the story, and he doesn't say that he told his employees to reject or ban him. He told them not to do anything until he met Holmes himself.

And, in combination with that the other article, it could mean that he had met with Holmes and afterwards decided to ban him.

I would be interested in reading that interview but I didn't see your link.

messages.

]http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120723/NATION/207230323/


Holmes attempted to join a Byers gun club on June 25, but his behavior was deemed too bizarre for membership.

It wasn't Holmes' club application that raised a red flag for Lead Valley Range owner Glenn Rotkovich, but rather the outgoing message on his answering machine.

"It was this deep, guttural voice, rambling something incoherent," Rotkovich said. "I thought, 'What is this idiot trying to be?'"

Rotkovich said he told his employees Holmes was not allowed on the premises.

So it shouldn't be hard to find.

And the owner is clear in the interview that he never met Holmes.

voice mail.

That's the bottom line, not whether or not he personally met with Holmes.

]http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120723/NATION/207230323/


Holmes attempted to join a Byers gun club on June 25, but his behavior was deemed too bizarre for membership.

It wasn't Holmes' club application that raised a red flag for Lead Valley Range owner Glenn Rotkovich, but rather the outgoing message on his answering machine.

"It was this deep, guttural voice, rambling something incoherent," Rotkovich said. "I thought, 'What is this idiot trying to be?'"

Rotkovich said he told his employees Holmes was not allowed on the premises.

to ban him from the premises.

]http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120723/NATION/207230323/


Holmes attempted to join a Byers gun club on June 25, but his behavior was deemed too bizarre for membership.

It wasn't Holmes' club application that raised a red flag for Lead Valley Range owner Glenn Rotkovich, but rather the outgoing message on his answering machine.

"It was this deep, guttural voice, rambling something incoherent," Rotkovich said. "I thought, 'What is this idiot trying to be?'"

Rotkovich said he told his employees Holmes was not allowed on the premises.

The club owner didn't say it was alarming, it said it was weird. Not the same thing at all.

And the article I read did NOT say that the employees were instructed not to accept him, it said that they were instructed to get the owner because he wanted to meet and get to know the guy first. Again, not the same thing at all.

"He left two other messages but eventually told his staff to watch out for Holmes at the July 1 orientation and not to accept him into the club, Rotkovich said."

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/22/4648754/police-colo-suspect-planned-massacre.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy

"I called him back a second day and a third day, and the third day I'm thinking, 'I'm not impressed with what's going on, no.' I told the staff, if this guy shows up, nothing happens till I meet him. I want to see him."

The "gun club guy" left him messages. He never responded. What was the "gun club guy" supposed to report him for?

"He left two other messages but eventually told his staff to watch out for Holmes at the July 1 orientation and not to accept him into the club, Rotkovich said."

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/22/4648754/police-colo-suspect-planned-massacre.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy

Does not support what your article states about Holmes being banned.

anytime anyone behaves a little oddly and they will just run right over and say "Yep, dude's crazy and needs meds/therapy" and take them off to the psych ward.

Completely impossible.

We have no system to deal with the mentally ill in this country until they try to hurt themselves or others.

It was clearly stated in the article:

"He left two other messages but eventually told his staff to watch out for Holmes at the July 1 orientation and not to accept him into the club, Rotkovich said.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/22/4648754/police-colo-suspect-planned-massacre.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy

"I called him back a second day and a third day, and the third day I'm thinking, 'I'm not impressed with what's going on, no.' I told the staff, if this guy shows up, nothing happens till I meet him. I want to see him."

It's entirely conceivable that one day, he could have told his staff, "I want to see him." And the next day, he could have said, "if he comes in, don't accept him."

Luckily for the owner, he didn't return.

Of course it contradicts the article you posted. Perhaps he did give different interviews, but regardless, the articles contradict each other. And since the LA Times article actually quotes the owner, as opposed to the Sacramento Bee article, I find the LA Times article to be more believable.

Absolutely terrifying, but so true.

He wasn't trouble when he hit 18. He had graduated from college with no problems whatsoever.
In fact, did great in college.
Then moved away to graduate school. Absolutely nothing to suggest parents knew he was troubled or need any help.

No one knows yet what kind of clues might have been occurring over the last several months, except for the club owner who was smart enough to ban him from his club.

Which has been pointed out at least ten times on this thread.

Is that clear enough for you?

There isn't necessarily any contradiction between the various reports. The owner may have initially told his employees he wanted to speak to the guy before he'd accept him. Later, he told them Holmes wasn't allowed on the premises.


http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120723/NATION/207230323/


Holmes attempted to join a Byers gun club on June 25, but his behavior was deemed too bizarre for membership.

It wasn't Holmes' club application that raised a red flag for Lead Valley Range owner Glenn Rotkovich, but rather the outgoing message on his answering machine.

"It was this deep, guttural voice, rambling something incoherent," Rotkovich said. "I thought, 'What is this idiot trying to be?'"

Rotkovich said he told his employees Holmes was not allowed on the premises.

during the three years prior to her psychotic break and diagnosis. Our family racked our brains trying to remember some clue that we had missed something. But Mom was very good at faking normalcy.

When she was on meds and we talked to her, things she said made it abundantly clear that her disordered mental processes went back AT LEAST 3 years.

Even decades later when she was still travelling around, completely delusional and unhinged, she could fool people who knew her well. We'd talk to them and they just couldn't fathom how ill she was, because at least to them she seemed perfectly ok. But I would have phone conversations with her, and read her letters, and the woman was completely batshit insane, a la some Stephen King novel.

I haven't seen anything to suggest they had any idea that he had issues. He graduated from college with honors. One of the best students. Then moved away to graduate school.
What were they supposed to alert on?

I have tried to do something similar in two different states (CA and TX) in order to alert authorities that there was a person I considered dangerous to others. In both states the police said unless the person had committed a crime they would not get involved. In CA I tried a number in the phonebook listed as State Mental Health Services (or something like that, it was 20 years ago.) They said that they do not get involved in law enforcement.

Who do you think you would call in a similar situation where you live? Serious question.

We need some real answers to real questions, not blanket accusations.

Sarcasm or no sarcasm.

Anyone here can be sarcastic without having to use a sarcasm tag.

It's good that you are amused when there are people searching for genuine answers to a very real problem.

Knock yourself out...just keep on giggling.

It's dark humor.

Yeah, I'm against trying to stop people from getting killed. Link to where I said that, please?

You are indeed a genius in addition to being so hilarious.

If you are, alert on yourself.

My neighbor is a Communist, lets say. I report them for having weapons and being dangerous and delusional. Want to bet that won't happen?

Also, who decides what is delusional and crazy? Someone beheading kittens in the backyard or wandering naked in the streets or beating his/her spouse.... give a call. But how about the SCA guy walking around in armor at odd hours, or the woman who absentmindedly talks to herself, or someone who just seems "off" to someone?

This reminds me of what I've read about the USSR, or how Leftists and so-called "sluts" were put into mental hospitals in the 20th Century -- in this country. Just no.

Shades of Orwell, too.

So you would have half the country reporting the other half. Unworkable.

Can't really think of anyway that could back fire.

A message on his voice mail? He is a young male. He would not be the first young male to have a bizarre message on a voice mail.

We can't compel anyone over the age of 18 to get help or even get assessed unless they are suicidal or homicidal or maybe if you have enough money for good lawyers.

If we can't force them to be examined, reporting them does no good.

At least not in my book.

It said, "bizarre," "guttural," and "freakish" -- whatever that means. But something about the voicemail or his subsequent behavior was disturbing enough to the owner to get Holmes banned from the club.

"I called him back a second day and a third day, and the third day I'm thinking, 'I'm not impressed with what's going on, no.' I told the staff, if this guy shows up, nothing happens till I meet him. I want to see him."

And the other article says he did ban the guy.

One article directly quotes the owner, and no ban is mentioned, and the other article doesn't quote the owner but makes the statement that the owner banned Holmes, with no quote to back it up.

Sloppy reporting, IMO.

Yet another source confirming that he was banned. Sounds clear to me.

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120723/NATION/207230323/


Holmes attempted to join a Byers gun club on June 25, but his behavior was deemed too bizarre for membership.

It wasn't Holmes' club application that raised a red flag for Lead Valley Range owner Glenn Rotkovich, but rather the outgoing message on his answering machine.

"It was this deep, guttural voice, rambling something incoherent," Rotkovich said. "I thought, 'What is this idiot trying to be?'"

Rotkovich said he told his employees Holmes was not allowed on the premises.



From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120723/NATION/207230323#ixzz21QOBapb9

and never met with him.

Probably not a good idea.

Don

<sarcasm>

If that were implemented, DU's serial alerters would have a field day reporting every dude with tats and piercings that walked through their neighborhood.

They are extremely difficult to own, and the ATF must approve you.

Last edited Mon Jul 23, 2012, 02:22 PM - Edit history (1)

But that expired in 2004.

http://atlantablackstar.com/2012/07/23/batman-shooter-used-a-gun-that-was-banned-until-2004/

As the gun advocates start issuing their reasons why any bans on assault weapons won’t reduce the killing of innocent people in the United States, a report in the Wall Street Journal pointed out that the gun used by Aurora theater shooter James Holmes and the amount of ammunition available to him actually was banned by the federal government until Congress let the ban expire in 2004.

Under a ban passed in 1994 during the Clinton Administration, there were federal restrictions on the sales of AR-15, the gun used by James Holmes. But the ban expired in 2004 under the Bush Administration and was not re-enacted.

There is still a ban in place in California, Holmes’ home state, against versions of the AR-15—but Holmes legally bought all three of his guns in Arizona, which has no such ban.

The previous federal law also would have restricted the ammunition to a magazine holding just 10 rounds, rather than the 100-round drum magazine that Colorado authorities said Holmes used in Aurora.

SNIP

*sarcasm*

People will be reporting everybody they don't like. The black man down the street, the young guy up the road, anybody who doesn't act or look like them.

This is akin to vigilante justice, and having people turning in their fellow members of society has never worked. It leads to abuse and worse.

Last edited Mon Jul 23, 2012, 11:00 AM - Edit history (1)

Neighbors gay? Suspicious, and according to Rev McClurkin who was a surrogate to Obama, gays are under Demonic influences!!!! So your idea is that folks who see demons should report those who are unsound of mind? On DU folks say being gay is just a 'preference' so it is willful as well as suspect, other DUers have admitted to posting 'gays are not to be trusted around kids' and you think such people should get to report us when THEY feel suspicious?
It is more than Ashcroftian, veering toward the Soviet, what you suggest.