Patterico's Pontifications

9/17/2013

Navy Yard Shooter Previously Arrested for Shooting

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:32 am

At an unoccupied car:

Aaron Alexis, the man identified by Washington D.C. police as a suspect in this morning’s tragic attack on a US Navy Yard, was previously arrested by Seattle police in 2004 for shooting out the tires of another man’s vehicle in what Alexis later described to detectives as an anger-fueled “blackout.”

Because Seattle police have received numerous inquiries about the incident, we are posting the details, detective logs, and the original report for the May 6, 2004 case.

At about 8 am that morning, two construction workers had parked their 1986 Honda Accord in the driveway of their worksite, next to a home where Alexis was staying in the Beacon Hill neighborhood.

The victims reported seeing a man, later identified by police as Alexis, walk out of the home next to their worksite, pull a gun from his waistband and fire three shots into the two rear tires of their Honda before he walked slowly back to his home north of the construction site.

It’s not immediately clear to me whether the witnesses were in the car when the shooting happened. If they were not, the truth is that most states do not punish a shooting at an unoccupied vehicle terribly harshly. With hindsight, the average citizen looks at a story like this and wonders whether more could have been done, but unless someone has a long record, you generally can’t lock up people for a long time for something like this.

281 Comments

  1. Angela Corey may have her good points after all. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Corey#Ronald_Thompson_case

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:37 am

  2. Media now reporting the shooter did not have an AR-15, but instead had a shotgun along with several pistols. One report still says he DID have an AR-15, which he took from a police officer.

    Please wait 15 minutes; all this will completely change.

    Comment by navyvet (02dd07) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:42 am

  3. So, basically, since this loon slipped through the background check that goes with most people who work for Government Contractors (or did the Main Stream Liars get that wrong too?), background checks are functionally null.

    Comment by C. S. P. Schofield (adb9dd) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:59 am

  4. C.S.P. Schofield, no not at all. Background checks are very effective at slowing down law abiding people with mismatched records, erroneous dispositions, and outright background check clerk incompetence placing holds or denials erroneously.

    Their success in actually stopping criminals … err, null.

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:04 am

  5. That seems to have gotten him into more serious trouble, but I think it was the shooting in 2010 that was more ominous.

    I think maybe it’s like this:

    In 2004, when living in Seattle, Washington, he had been having a simmering argument with construction workers over parking spaces they were taking up. He shot out the tires of one car.

    He later explained, he blacked out and went into a rage because the man had disrepected him some way.

    His father and others explained he had Post-Traumatic-Stress-Syndrome because he had been near Ground Zero in New York on September 11, 2011 and the chgarges were dropped.

    In 2010, while living in Fort Worth Texas, he had had a running argument with the upstairs neighbor. He confronted her one time in a parking lot claiming she was making noise. One day a shot went through the floor and into the ceiling of the upstairs apartment, near a place she used to sit. When police investigated he explained he had been cleasning his gun while cooking (food, I assume, NOT THE GUN) and it accidentally went off. Indeed at the the polioce man saw it, the gun was disassembled and covered in oil.

    The Ft. Worth police officer who interviewd him asked him him why he did not call the police or check on the neighbor himself, and he replied that he did not think the bullet went through because he could not see any light through the hole.

    He was arrested for discharging a firearm within city limits, but the charges were eventually dropped. The woman (who moved out afterwards) did not believe this was an accident, but their lawyer explained there was no way to prove otherwise.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:05 am

  6. Here is a copy of the Seattle police report regarding Aaron Alexis’ 2004 arrest.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:21 am

  7. We are going to see that this guy was similar to Loughner, the guy who shot Gabby Giffords, multiple minor to moderate encounters with police that point to mental issues, all unresolved.

    With Holmes, the Aurora theater shooter, the case is even more egregious with Colorado state employees covering up their incompetence in dealing with someone that was making detailed active threats and that they knew was psychotic.

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:27 am

  8. Considering all the hubbub the other day;

    http://nationalreport.net/shellie-zimmerman-arrested-charged-battery-george-zimmerman/

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:31 am

  9. The truth comes out very slowly in cases like this. One thing seems obvious. The killer was given plenty of chances and opportunities.

    Did the authorities even consider denying him a security clearance?

    Comment by DN (e45de4) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:38 am

  10. no other news source shows in a search for items on Shellie Z being arrested.

    i don’t think i’d place much credence in that story.

    Comment by redc1c4 (abd49e) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:42 am

  11. http://blogs.orlandoweekly.com/index.php/2013/09/shellie-zimmerman-arrested-internet-hoax/

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (375edc) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:06 am

  12. http://www.tucsonweekly.com/TheRange/archives/2013/08/26/national-report-proves-that-not-everyone-on-internet-can-write-satire

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (375edc) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:09 am

  13. Politico reports that Alexis’ employer didn’t know about his arrest record. Alexis had worked for them from Sept 2012 to January 2013, possibly in Japan, and since July 2013 at various locations in the DC -Virginia area. Alexis went back to school from January to July 2013.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:12 am

  14. Confession. Amnesia. Self-professed “blackout” rage. Paranoid excuses. A history of mental issues.

    This needed prosecution to make sure the person can’t have a gun.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:15 am

  15. I interview and examine recruits for the US military. This guy would NOT have been qualified unless he got a waiver from the service and probably they would not have done so. One big item in interviewing recruits is the mental and anger stuff. I don’t know how he got accepted. That is a mystery. I hesitate to suggest affirmative action since I’ve not seen that.

    Comment by MikeK (dc6ffe) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:30 am

  16. If only it was Joe Horn living in that upstairs apartment. For want of a nail ….

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:36 am

  17. If only the NSA had paid more attention to the content of Alexis’ emails, they could have stopped him. Or something.

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:41 am

  18. How does such a person get military clearances? As with Hassan and Manning inside, and this man and Snowden as contractor hires, doesn’t appear to be much in the way of abckgorund checks at all. Even if you think of Snowden and Manning as somehow defensible, neither based on their backgorund had any business in their respective jobs.

    Also, as to Clinton’s 1993 executive order, we trust military personnel with secrets,assets and weapons-except when they work in office buildings. That makes no sense. Seems Hassan and Alexis targeted military facilities exactly because they were certain to shoot a maximum number of military personnel with a minimal expectation of anyone with a gun stopping them quickly.

    Comment by Bugg (ddac6e) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:42 am

  19. Sarahw,

    Background checks are supposed to spot suspicious patterns like this. If they can’t flag cases like this (and they can), I doubt the criminal justice system with it’s restrictive evidence rules and civil rights requirements can do better.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:42 am

  20. I agree with Bugg.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:43 am

  21. When police investigated he explained he had been cleasning his gun while cooking (food, I assume, NOT THE GUN) and it accidentally went off.

    Who doesn’t like the taste of powder residue and Break-Free? That’s why I always cook and clean my guns at the same time.

    Oh, and failure to clear the weapon properly.

    Oh, and failure to keep it pointed in a safe direction — he knew there was someone living above him, but pointed the gun in that direction.

    Comment by Rob Crawford (e6f27f) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:45 am

  22. Mike K,

    It might have been the expansion in military waivers that took effect in 2007.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:46 am

  23. 19. Sarahw,

    Background checks are supposed to spot suspicious patterns like this. If they can’t flag cases like this (and they can), I doubt the criminal justice system with it’s restrictive evidence rules and civil rights requirements can do better.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:42 am

    Background investigations are supposed to spot suspicious patterns. But then reportedly this guy had a secret clearance, and they don’t do background investigations for secret clearances. They just check law enforcement records. The arrests should have come up, but he was never charged or convicted of anything. So he wouldn’t have had a criminal record.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:53 am

  24. This is a side effect of over-classification, IMHO. Just about everybody in the Navy has to have a confidential or secret clearance to do their jobs.

    The purpose of classifying information is supposed to be to protect it. But then if you’re giving just about anyone access to it if they can pass a cursory records check, how are you protecting it?

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:58 am

  25. Comment by MikeK (dc6ffe) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:30 am

    There seem to be quite a few parallels here with Christopher Dorner, who caused the Great L.A. Manhunt recently, also an ex-Navy person with anger-management issues.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:58 am

  26. Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:42 am

    “…I doubt the criminal justice system with it’s restrictive evidence rules and civil rights requirements can do better.”

    No doubt it DIDN’T do better. But it could have and should have, because it is currently the only means of checking the danger of the mentally ill to others around them.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:58 am

  27. He was armed with an AR-15 shotgun, which would be a devastating weapon, in the real world.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (89b580) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:59 am

  28. Then it’s a shame Alexis was never charged or convicted, but his arrest record should have come up when he joined the Naval Reserves. And I don’t understand why it’s not part of any employment screening.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:01 am

  29. When my BI was conducted by the OSI in 1961/1962, it took almost 8-months, and I had a verifiable history with no more than IIRC three addresses since Age-Four.
    It almost sounds as if the process has been dumbed down to the point that all they’re really doing is checking your credit history – and we know how accurate those are, there are never any erroneous entries.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:02 am

  30. What I’m saying is imperitive, is arrest and *follow through* (with charges and convictions whenever they can be possibly got) when context indicates mental problems.

    Giving breaks, letting it go or slide even a little, is no mercy to anyone.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:02 am

  31. “imperative”, sorry.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:03 am

  32. Sarahw,

    Do you really want the criminal justice system to enforce mental health screening?

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:03 am

  33. Comment by Colonel Haiku (89b580) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:59 am

    FBI says only three (3) weapons were recovered:
    A shotgun (no make/model revealed), and two (2) handguns (thought to have been taken from security personnel).

    There is a semi-auto shotgun in the market that resembles an AR-15:
    The Akdal (Turkey) MKA 1919!

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:05 am

  34. Traditionally, Sarahw, society expected family and friends to seek help from doctors and alert authorities regarding people who have mental health problems. What you’re suggesting is for law enforcement to not only police and prosecute, but also to evaluate mental health. It’s not a function they can do appropriately, nor should they.

    It reminds me of the way we’ve changed the rules for sex assaults on campus and the way we’ve authorized schoolteachers to diagnose and treat ADD and ADHD. It’s definitely easier for society but that doesn’t make it fair or right or good policy.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:13 am

  35. So many questions and virtually no hope of substantial answers since the MSM is doing the work…

    The ceiling shooting is odd in that it is my experience that disassembled handguns are difficult to shoot. That’s what I do with mine when the g-kids come to visit.

    Rob Crawford: don’t you know that the secret ingredient in 90% of award winning chili recipes is a tablespoon of Hoppe’s #9?

    Many BG investigations are superficial. Once the initial one is in the books, subsequent ones are often just “updates”… with the idea that “he was OK then so he should be OK now” attitude. I was interviewed as a source for someone’s very high level BG and they dwelt almost exclusively on his faithfulness to the US of A. Nothing about violence, mental instability, arrests… of which there was none, but they did not ask. And the interviewer was a contract investigator for a contract BG service that was hired by the government agency involved. It was all “gift-wrapped” of give the appearance that the FBI was doing the BG investigation. There are holes in the system and one would do well to always keep that in mind.

    Comment by gramps (6de5db) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:13 am

  36. CNN reported the “AR15 shotgun” fantasy.

    Comment by CrustyB (69f730) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:13 am

  37. Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:03 am

    Good point!

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:13 am

  38. The screening process is discriminatory, as it discriminates against teh Hispanic and black communities, who are convicted of crimes in disproportionate numbers.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (eacb1f) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:17 am

  39. 38- It would have nothing to do with the fact that they commit serious crimes way out of proportion to their share of the population-at-large – No, nothing at all.

    No Justice – No Peace!

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:26 am

  40. DRJ – “screening” was definitely inadequate in this case and it was no mercy to Aaron Alexis or anyone else.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:27 am

  41. It’s not a function they can do appropriately, nor should they.

    I”ll agree with that this far: consideration of mental illness should not lead to charges being dropped or swept aside.

    However, interaction with the criminal justice system is often the first time the mentally ill get diagnosis and treatment and any coercion to submit to treatment and follow-up. That’s a tragedy but it is so.

    It’s also the only method of barring the mentally ill, outside of commitment from access to guns that healthy people have as a right.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:31 am

  42. No one claims that common sense or logic are a part of the process. I think there may be government agencies that are acting in this manner vis-a-vis the screening process.

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (89b580) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:33 am

  43. Then it’s a shame Alexis was never charged or convicted, but his arrest record should have come up when he joined the Naval Reserves. And I don’t understand why it’s not part of any employment screening.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:01 am

    It came up in the sense that getting a clearance requires answering the question “Have you ever been arrested.”

    Of course, he could have explained it away sufficiently well that it wasn’t a flag. Or he could have lied.

    At SECRET or below it would probably have passed.

    Comment by Dan S (ea09ad) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:35 am

  44. Smallest violin anyone;

    http://twitchy.com/2013/09/17/waah-chuck-todd-real-navy-yard-victim-guess-what-is-at-fault-for-his-shoddy-reporting/

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:35 am

  45. Sarahw,

    I agree the police are on the front lines of mental health issues and they deal with this every day. But one incident of anger in 2004 doesn’t even put Alexis on the police’s radar for mental health problems.

    If you want him to be, then you’re going to have to admit that everyone has a mental health disorder, and maybe the police should prosecute and lock up everyone.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:39 am

  46. Dan S,

    Then who are we fooling? There’s no point to a SECRET clearance except to run a criminal record, and even that would go away if the Obama Administration has its way.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:47 am

  47. Has anyone ever seen Chuck Todd and Honest Reporting in same place at same time? Didn’t think so…

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (9fea4c) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:55 am

  48. Sarahw,

    What you are reacting to isn’t the 2004 incident. You’re combining that with the shooting and the reports of paranoia and hearing voices. That is a powerful combination but the shooting happened yesterday and the report of paranoia/voices was apparently first made in August 2013, when Alexis sought mental health help. (But I bet his family knew before then, don’t you?)

    I wish we could have prevented this, too, and maybe the answer is zero tolerance for all gun crimes. But I’m not convinced it’s the answer and I’d rather look into ways to help families report their concerns, especially with adult children. They are the ones who are really on the front lines.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:59 am

  49. We need more gun control to keep the world safe. That’s why we need to transport arms to the Syrian rebels—so the world will become safer ! Or something.

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:01 am

  50. Looney toons:

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/09/glenn-beck-calls-for-obama-impeachment/

    What is the point, with only one helpless half of one branch of government?

    Pour dust on your head, curse God and die!

    Comment by gary gulrud (dd7d4e) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:01 am

  51. By the way, where is EPWJ to provide us with the latest information from his “inside sources” ?

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:02 am

  52. By the way, where is EPWJ to provide us with the latest information from his “inside sources” ?

    Prolly waiting for the Finknado and Limperor to provide the “inside” links to NYT articles with a fifty percent fact accuracy.

    Comment by gungrabbiest (b2ae07) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:05 am

  53. Apparently it might not have mattered even if Aaron Alexis had a criminal record:

    A draft Pentagon Inspector General report found 52 convicted felons received routine, unauthorized access to military facilities.
    ***
    Congressional aides said that the report, first reported by Time magazine, found that 52 convicted felons had received unauthorized access to military facilities.

    It also found that the Navy cut costs in its security for controlling access and “did not effectively mitigate access control risks,” the aide said.

    Another congressional aide said that the Navy was cutting its costs mentioned in the report in order to grapple with the $487 billion, 10-year Pentagon budget reductions from the 2011 Budget Control Act, and not the sequester.

    I think the problem is lax or non-existent background checks, but that didn’t stop the DC Mayor from blaming the sequester.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:07 am

  54. I think the problem is lax or non-existent background checks, but that didn’t stop the DC Mayor from blaming the sequester.

    Anyone relying on a politician, or MBM news reporter, for an accurate statement will be disappointed nearly 100% of the time.

    Comment by gungrabbiest (b2ae07) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:10 am

  55. (But I bet his family knew before then, don’t you?)

    They knew it in 2004. I think 2004 records show strong clues he was paranoid and had auditory hallucinations then (e.g. the claim of mocking when the workers said they hadn’t interacted).

    Yes, its in hindsight that the overall picture is formed, and by which I judge turns in his story.
    But even then, the confession, the self-professed “blackout rage” and the history of PTSD should have ended with a “danger to others” tag, in the form of a convinction. If he was shown leniency, if that’s what happened, they did him no favor.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:16 am

  56. Whether AR-15 shotgun or BB gun, Piers Morgan asks “what does it matter?”

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (86ce72) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:20 am

  57. George Zimmerman’s fault !

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:20 am

  58. Joe Citizen shouldn’t be allowed to have a handgun, but let’s allow Iran to develop nukes !

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:23 am

  59. DRJ, the first criminal event I read about in his past was the ceiling deal. THere were hints in that report, to me, of auditory hallucinations in (I only read about him seeking care this August this morning via the AP story.)

    That impression became stronger when I read of the 2004 incident, also before his auditory hallucinations were actually mentioned in that AP report. Angry, grudgebearing paranoia also fit with his final murders, of course. I had read some early reports by Mr. Happy Bowl friend and just sort of in between the lines saw some confirmation traits I associate with paranoia and self-absorbed grandiosity and maybe spiritual fixation.

    I thought it was clear from the 2004 story the guy was nuts. I think it was clear to everyone involved in 2004 that he was nuts. They cut him a break, and that was a mistake.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:29 am

  60. Alexis did interact with the workers at the construction site, although he didn’t interact with them on the day of the shooting. Page 4 of the police report states Alexis claimed “the victim had mocked him earlier that morning after after he discovered his own vehicle had been tampered with.” In addition, the victim admitted to the police that Alexis was “angered over the parking problem outside the construction site.”

    The police correctly prepared this case for charges against Alexis of Property Damage and Discharge of a Firearm, and sent it to the Municipal Court. But I submit that, on these facts, this case was more like a road rage case than a mental health issue. You are letting your knowledge of what Alexis did recently color your judgment of what he did in 2004.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:29 am

  61. Wikipedia now lists twelve names of those killed in the Navy Yard shootings yesterday:

    Michael Arnold, 59
    Martin Bodrog, 54
    Arthur Daniels, 51
    Sylvia Frasier, 53
    Kathy Gaarde, 62
    John Roger Johnson, 73
    Mary Francis Knight, 51
    Frank Kohler, 50
    Vishnu Pandit, 61
    Kenneth Bernard Proctor, 46
    Gerald Read, 58
    Richard Michael Ridgell, 52

    May they rest in honored peace. My condolences to their families, friends, and those who loved them.

    Comment by htom (412a17) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:31 am

  62. Correction: Alexis did interact with the workers at the construction site, although he didn’t interact with them on the day at the time of the shooting.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:31 am

  63. Thank you, htom. God bless them.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:32 am

  64. If it hadn’t been for this unexpected calamity featuring that crazy Alexis person, the Obamas could have shaken their groove thang with Rickey Martin at the White House on Monday night !

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:33 am

  65. 61. You’ll notice a lot of them are in their 50s and 60s. 3 over 60, 8 in their 50s, the youngest aged 46. This could not have a random sample of the people there. He was gunning for “bosses.”

    (Only 3 people were wounded by gunfire)

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (65546b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:33 am

  66. I have no first hand experience with military clearances so I have a hard time understanding what “secret “clearance” means or why some one of his caliber (no apparent specialized education or experience and a low level rank when in the military) would be given one. Could his ability to speak Thai be a reason? Or what else?

    Comment by elissa (bf3931) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:34 am

  67. 62. In 2004, he didn’t want to, or dare to, hurt people, but he wanted his parking space back.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (65546b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:34 am

  68. Sammy:

    This could not have a random sample of the people there. He was gunning for “bosses.”

    As usual, I disagree. These were people sitting in the cafeteria eating breakfast. In my experience, older people are more likely to eat and enjoy breakfast. Younger people tend to sleep in or skip breakfast.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:37 am

  69. But I submit that, on these facts, this case was more like a road rage case than a mental health issue.

    Dude, “road rage” IS a mental health issue. I get frustrated at other drivers, but would never even consider using a firearm.

    Comment by Rob Crawford (e6f27f) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:38 am

  70. You’ll notice a lot of them are in their 50s and 60s. 3 over 60, 8 in their 50s, the youngest aged 46. This could not have a random sample of the people there. He was gunning for “bosses.”

    Really? Didn’t he shoot security personnel? So the Naval Yard has the same type of security as the local mall? Interesting!

    Comment by gungrabbiest (b2ae07) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:38 am

  71. As you note, the ages of the deceased are interesting, Sammy.

    Comment by elissa (bf3931) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:38 am

  72. But one incident of anger in 2004 doesn’t even put Alexis on the police’s radar for mental health problems.

    Once incident in 2001 and another in 2004.

    I still cannot believe the police bought the “cleaning my gun and it went off” lie in 2001.

    Comment by Rob Crawford (e6f27f) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:40 am

  73. == older people are more likely to eat and enjoy breakfast. Younger people tend to sleep in or skip breakfast==

    Heh, DRJ. There you go stereotyping again!

    Comment by elissa (bf3931) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:40 am

  74. Prepare for the onslaught of the Finknado! Ready, set, comment!

    Comment by gungrabbiest (b2ae07) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:41 am

  75. Comment by elissa (bf3931) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:34 am

    So much BS within the Govt is classified, that to access any kind of useful information you need a minimum of SECRET clearance.
    It only starts getting interesting when you get into TOP SECRET, and the really juicy stuff is found in TOP SECRET – SPECIAL COMPARTMENTALIZED INFORMATION (TSCW) (which is where Manning and Snowden were mucking about).

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:42 am

  76. elissa,

    Alexis was working for a civilian contractor that was doing work on Navy computer systems, and I assume that was why he was cleared to work at the Navy Yard:

    “Aaron Alexis was an employee of a company called ‘The Experts,’ a subcontractor to an HP Enterprise Services contract to refresh equipment used on the Navy Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) network,” said a company spokesperson who asked not to be named. “HP is cooperating fully with law enforcement as requested.” The company referred all further questions to The Experts.

    That doesn’t mean he was cleared to work in Building 197, only that he was cleared to be on base, but he didn’t need to be cleared if he shot his way in.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:43 am

  77. It was a blatant stereotype, elissa. Mea culpa!

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:44 am

  78. Heh, DRJ. There you go stereotyping again!

    Probably just recounting personal experience.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:44 am

  79. Rob Crawford,

    My experience is that everything is a mental health issue to the police because they are dealing with human nature, but they have to prioritize. Road rage is so common that there aren’t enough jails for everyone. Thankfully, mental illness like Jared Loughner, James Holmes, and Aaron Alexis have isn’t as common.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:47 am

  80. True, askeptic. Gone are the days when I could sleep late. I get up way too early now for my taste.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:48 am

  81. May help explain clearance of Aaron Alexis:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xR9HuRUUTbs

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:55 am

  82. From Reuters:

    “He did have a secret clearance. And he did have a CAC (common access card),” said Thomas Hoshko, CEO of The Experts Inc, which was helping service the Navy Marine Corps Intranet as a subcontractor for HP Enterprise Services, part of Hewlett-Packard Co.
    …..
    Asked when Alexis was supposed to start work, Hoshko said in a telephone interview: “That’s what I got to find out, if he was supposed to start today … It’s not clear to me.”
    Hoshko said he was unaware of any issues with misconduct involving Alexis or any possible grievance that could have led to the shooting.
    Alexis had previously worked for The Experts in Japan from September 2012 to January 2013, he said.
    “We had just recently re-hired him. Another background investigation was re-run and cleared through the defense security service in July 2013,” Hoshko said.
    Hoshko said he believed that Alexis’ “secret” security clearance dated back to 2007.
    The Navy said Alexis enlisted as a full-time Navy reservist in May 2007. He was discharged in 2011 after a series of misconduct issues, a Navy official said.

    Comment by elissa (bf3931) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:55 am

  83. Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:29 am

    I absolutely am looking at the bigger picture, DRJ, with hindsight and even from the start including not only the navy-yard rampage but the 2010 incident. I am looking through that lens of time and events.

    But I say that it was all there to be seen in 2004 for anyone looking. It’s all completely there to see. His “blackout rage” is abnormal, his glaring and glowering vigil is abnormal, his discharge of his weapon alarmingly abnormal and criminal to boot. The Dad’s rush to protect with the sob story shows consciousness of his kid being wound too tight and having mental problems – not just “anger management” issues.

    It helped Dad talk the situation down,.

    (FWEIW, I don’t believe that Alexis’ car was tampered with, not for a second.)

    My understanding is the he worker whose tires were shot said affirmatively that he never spoke to Alexis, but whatever happened my impression was formed from that idea.

    We might part company here: I would even argue that “road rage” brandishing (let alone discharge of a weapon to destroy tires or other property) is a sign of mental problems in need of evaluation , and should be enough to cost anyone their right to own/carry.

    Combined with the actual destruction of property
    and profession of “blackout rage” while doing it – actual amnesia – and family-described history of lingering mental problems since a traumatic event, leniency was error.

    When there are hints, sign, indicators of mental illness, get that conviction. Don’t let it slide, because it will happen again, and it will only get worse.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:59 am

  84. Sarahw,

    I agree with you that the mentally ill should not have guns but I don’t agree that one criminal conviction, let alone an arrest, is necessarily a sign of mental illness. Maybe you can spot mental illness from a single police report but that’s not typical, and I’m not willing to let our system run that way. The best way to know if people are mentally ill is from their families, friends, and health care providers, and I think that’s where the answer lies.

    Of course, with ObamaCare, we’ll probably all get mental health screening and I have no doubt that conservatives will be reported to the government so they can take away our guns. Welcome to the new gun-free America!

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 12:05 pm

  85. ” I don’t agree one criminal conviction, let alone an arrest, is necessarily a sign of mental illness”

    I don’t agree it is either. I’m arguing something else. I’m arguing the signs of mental illness are a reason to pursue convictions with all the more vigor, instead of a reason to be lenient. A conviction of misusing a gun, however should be enough to limit automatic right to carry, and flag others to the real antisocial behaviors.

    Ir’s very unfortunate but presently, the coercive power of the state through convictions is the main way that the mentally ill get ordered evaluations, diagnosis, treatment, forced followup. It would have prevented a lot of the harms that followed.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 12:19 pm

  86. Do you think every person charged with a gun crime should have a mental health evaluation?

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 12:25 pm

  87. Or should we just trust prosecutors to use that power as they see fit?

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 12:25 pm

  88. I think you need to think about why we have a criminal justice system. It does not exist to stop crime (except for deterrence via capital punishment). It exists to punish crime that has already occurred.

    If we change that, the criminal justice system will become a destructive and dangerous weapon for whoever happens to be in charge at the time. It will make the IRS scandal look like a picnic.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 12:28 pm

  89. Parts of this conversation remind me of Solzhenitsyn; or rather, inspires me to think that some of you have some reading to do.

    Comment by htom (412a17) — 9/17/2013 @ 12:36 pm

  90. Sarahw,

    Feel free to speculate but you have no actual knowledge about why Alexis wasn’t prosecuted in 2004. You’ve decided it was leniency and gullibility regarding claims Alexis had PTSD after 9/11, but I suggested it could also be because there was no complaining witness willing or available to testify. Like it or not, prosecutors aren’t going to use CSI-type resources to prosecute a case like this without a complaining witness. In addition, if there were a witness willing to testify, I submit the prosecutors probably would have gone forward because it was open and shut.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 12:42 pm

  91. htom,

    I hope you are referring to being imprisoned for thought crimes because, otherwise, I need some refreshing.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 12:43 pm

  92. Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:59 am

    His “blackout rage” is abnormal

    And probably a lie – but it was his get-out-of-jail-free card.

    He had no blackout. To have a blackout that was not caused by alcohol (*) or drugs would be exceedingly strange, and I don’t think September 11th could cause it.

    He shot out the tires because he didn’t want the construction workers parking there. Simple as that. But that would be the crime of extortion.

    So when the police got involved, he told another (in my view, implausible) story.

    He knew he could not openly threaten, so much so that he tried to communicate what he wanted nonverbally.

    http://spdblotter.seattle.gov/2013/09/16/suspect-in-navy-yard-attack-previously-arrested-in-seattle-for-anger-fueled-shooting/

    When detectives interviewed workers and a manager at the construction site, they told police Alexis had “stared” at construction workers at the job site every day over the last month prior to the shooting.
    Some, but not all, people got the message.
    The owner of the construction business told police he believed Alexis was angry over the parking situation around the work site

    what that probably means is that Aaron Alexis had complained to the owner of the construction business, but did not accompany it by any threats, since he knew that illegal. He just tried staring, and, finally, shooting out the tires of a car. The Mafia also is believed to sometimes avoid being explicit. At least maybe in some movies.

    In 2010, also, he tried scaring someone, without saying anything verbally, whcih could be evidence.

    * He actually was somethinbg of an alcoholic.

    http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-navy-shooter-profile-20130917,0,706102,full.story

    But Nutpisit Suthamtewakul said Alexis drank alcohol, always carried a gun and “acted childish — not like a 34-year-old.”

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 9/17/2013 @ 12:53 pm

  93. vicious and stupid is no way to go through life:

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ar-15-rifle-sport-hunting-humans-article-1.1458039

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/17/2013 @ 12:59 pm

  94. Dr. Finkelman, good intentions aside I think you may be wildly out of your league in attempting to diagnose what is and is not mental illness.

    Comment by elissa (bf3931) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:00 pm

  95. 90. Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 12:42 pm

    Feel free to speculate but you have no actual knowledge about why Alexis wasn’t prosecuted in 2004.

    There seems to be a consensus in the media it had to so with his excuse.

    Here is soem of the police information (not what the porosecutor decided)

    http://spdblotter.seattle.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Alexis.pdf

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:00 pm

  96. You aren’t hearing me, I don’t think.

    My goal is not to make the criminal justice system the arbiter of mental health, but to have mental illness recognized and dealt with at the earliest possible opportunity to protect the true short and long term interests of all.

    But until there is some method to reliably sift out the ill, criminal actions are now what generally serves the purpose of bringing mental illness to a place where it can be addressed with or without the ill person’s insight or voluntary assistance.

    If Dad had managed to get his adult son committed and accurately diagnosed and barred from weapons ownership and a military career, well that would be peachy. But there are obvious reasons of understanding, actual ability and intervening self-interest or contrary interest to interfere with that happening.

    The criminal justice system gets this dubious honor of dealing with the mentally ill because other mechanisms are no longer in place, and, sadly. because families are actually not able to get their family member’s help, or even understand just what exactly is going on with the ill family member.

    What should have happened here, is recognition that in this specific case there were clear, and I mean CLEAR indications of Alexis not only behaving in a dangerous, destructive, abnormal anti-social manner with a deadly weapon, but that he was struggling with chronic emotional problems. (read: mental illness).

    He was given leniency and that was a mistake.

    Shoot your weapon to get revenge in a “blackout rage” out of malice for some kind of teasing, and that should be enough to cost you your right to own a gun, leaving out any question of mental condition.

    But here there were signs he wasn’t right in the head, and even some argument to that effect. It was used to explain his abnormal antisocial actions and gained him sympathy and a break.

    This is the opposite of what should have happened.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:01 pm

  97. The fact that Aaron Alexis claimed in 2004 that he remembered shooting out the tires an hour after he’d done it, proves he whole story of suffering a blackout is a lie.

    In a real life blackout, you (usually) don’t remember it later – in fact what a “blackout” really is, is knowing what you are doing and remembering it from one moment to the other, but the memory not lasting, for chemical reasons.

    He just said that to dodge reponsibility.

    It happened to be that this kind of story – throwing in PTSD and 9/11 too – would get him off, and if things were different and it wouldn’t have gotten him off, he would have told a different story.

    He just simply wanted to force the construction workers to leave him a parking space. All else was lies.

    Again, in 2010, he just wanted peace and quiet from his neighbor. So he acted like he was very dangerous.

    Ths time, obviously, he could not hope for success, like he had had in 2010 when the neighbor moved out (I don’t know if he got his parking space in 2004)

    He must have given up on life, but wanted revenge against “the brass” before his end. Something like that.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (65546b) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:17 pm

  98. 96. @Sarahw.

    Are you are saying that a claim of Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome because of being present at or near Ground Zero on September 11, 2001, should be not be a ground for leniency, but rather, for more vigorous prosecution?

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (65546b) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:22 pm

  99. The beauty of Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome because of being present at or near Ground Zero on September 11, 2001 is that:

    1. It’s not really a bad mental illness.

    2. It’s not his fault.

    3. It gets better with time.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (65546b) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:24 pm

  100. DRJ, they had a confession. It should have been enough. You don’t need the victim to testify. You do, perhaps, need the paperwork. Seattle won’t, or can’t, explain the failure to refer charges.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:28 pm

  101. Sarahw,

    I hear you but I simply don’t agree that we know Alexis was mentally ill in 2004 or that we know why Alexis wasn’t prosecuted in 2004. Until we know these claims to be facts, we can’t know if it would have made a difference in 2013 — especially since we also know that people with felony records are working in military facilities.

    For instance, even if he had been convicted, I doubt Alexis would have been convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor with domestic violence, so he would still have a right to own a gun. And I’m even more doubtful that he wouldn’t have been committed for 9 years based on these facts.

    Furthermore, when you persist in suggesting you know Alexis has been mentally ill since 2004 and that you know he wasn’t prosecuted because of leniency, I submit you are the one who isn’t hearing me. You don’t have to agree with my conclusions but I wish you would consider whether I might be right and respond, even if only hypothetically. Because if I’m right, it changes everything, doesn’t it?

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:31 pm

  102. Sarahw #95,

    I’ve linked the Seattle police report several times at this website. I’ve read it. I don’t agree with your conclusions as to what it means.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:35 pm

  103. Mental health treatment will not recover so long as people like Thomas Szaz make a living selling books on Amazon.

    Comment by MikeK (dc6ffe) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:40 pm

  104. Sarahw:

    DRJ, they had a confession. It should have been enough.

    I agree. It should have been enough, along with corroborating evidence like the shell casings and the gun — although I doubt they did any forensic testing on a case like this. But they also weren’t going to prosecute without a complaining witness to show a crime had been committed, especially if the victim wanted money instead of his day in court.

    Nevertheless, it was a good case and the prosecutors almost certainly would have won if they had pursued it. Maybe you’re right that the prosecutors felt bad for Alexis after 9/11 but you don’t know that. Maybe I’m right and their victim wasn’t available. Or maybe it fell through the cracks.

    The fact that you don’t know and each is plausible is another reason not to look to the criminal justice system for answers to problems like this. It should be the responsibility of health care providers and family members to solve problems like this.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:43 pm

  105. Nevertheless, it was a good case and the prosecutors almost certainly would have won if they had pursued it. **

    ** With a witness. Prosecutors need a witness to win cases like this.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:45 pm

  106. Sammy Finkelman (65546b) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:22 pm

    If guilty of a rage-crime related to that diagnosis, no it should not be a mitigating factor, but amplify concern of danger to the community.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:45 pm

  107. I’m sure everyone is tired of my comments. What do you think, Mike K? What is the best way to handle mental health issues like this?

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:46 pm

  108. elissa, a “secret” clearance is pretty low level. It means that when the installation’s security flunky interviewed you, your KGB badge didn’t fall out of your pocket.

    If information is classified “secret”, it means that its actually available on the magazine rack of your 7-11.

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:49 pm

  109. “By the way, where is EPWJ to provide us with the latest information from his “inside sources” ?”

    EPWJ is terrified of my cabal and is cowering in the corner.

    Cabal: To your horses! Saddle up! Tonight we ride!

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 9/17/2013 @ 1:50 pm

  110. Thanks to all who responded to my “clearance” question.

    Comment by elissa (bf3931) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:02 pm

  111. Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:48 am

    I know the feeling, I’m tired of telling the Rooster to “Get To Work!”

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:06 pm

  112. DRJ

    “It should be the responsibility of health care providers and family members to solve problems like this.”

    Should. But is not only not what happens, it almost can’t. And when the mentally ill break the law, its not a private matter anymore.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:09 pm

  113. Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 12:43 pm

    I think this goes back to the workings of the “justice system” in the late lamented Soviet Union.
    Being the Worker’s Paradise that it was, almost all crimes were classified as Crimes Against the State,
    and since the State was a Paradise, one had to have been crazy to commit them.
    Thus, one of the first stops was the local “Mental Health Institute” for an evaluation, before they shipped you off to the Gulag for “re-education”.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:15 pm

  114. Soviet gulags are not to be mocked, but the reality is mentally ill people are not all imaginary or imagined “enemies of the state”. They are really sick, and many really dangerous.

    The “mostly harmless” mentally ill are akin to “mostly peaceful” muslims or rather “mostly peaceful” leftist demonstrations.

    Some aren’t harmless at all. I submit the ones who shoot their guns when very put out, who imagine others mock, belittle or target them, who are self-absorbed, grudgeholding and resentful, who talk about their superior talents or importance compared to other beings – those who hear things other people can’t, who drink or use street drugs to quiet their anxiety. Who think they are using microwave machines to send vibrations through the ceiling (ie, Alexis) – are dangerous.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:27 pm

  115. “who think strangers are using microwave machines” &c

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:28 pm

  116. #91, DRJ and #113, askeptic — you’ve got it.

    Comment by htom (412a17) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:29 pm

  117. Sammy – Do you post most of your comments here in a blackout?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:33 pm

  118. Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:27 pm

    Not being a mental health professional, but I would say that what we’re trying to deal with here is a form of Schizophrenia, which is very serious, and something that the mental-health community does a piss-poor job dealing with, particularly since the emptying of the “nut-houses” in the 60′s and 70′s. This action did not treat the ill well at all.
    A great resource on this is Clayton Cramer, who has written a book or two on the subject due to his personal involvement in the illness that his brother suffers.

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:34 pm

  119. you can’t, for the most part, force the mentally ill to receive care, or even take medications that will help them.

    this is the end result of the revulsion in the 60′s & 70′s to the horror stories about people being institutionalized for years, whether or not they needed it.

    the problem with pendulums is that they rarely swing just a little.

    Comment by redc1c4 (abd49e) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:39 pm

  120. There are probably better reports out there, this is the first link to grab for the “microwave” delusion. http://www.newser.com/story/174405/shooter-told-cops-enemies-harassed-him-with-microwaves.html

    Alexis probably had such delusions in the past, and I think he did, if less floridly expressed; and all the way back to the early aughts.

    Paranoid schizophrenia is a progressive disease and given all that went on I think it began to manifest long ago and has been long term and chronic.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:44 pm

  121. Sarahw,

    Let’s be clear about what you want:

    ** You want zero tolerance, maximum prosecutions for people who show signs that you and some health care providers interpret as mental illness, but others might not.

    ** You want this rule to be applied in an era where doctors write seriously about how everyone can be deemed mentally ill.

    ** You want this rule to apply to every person in every court in the nation, even though not every mentally ill person murders someone and most mass murderers aren’t mentally ill.

    ** You argue for this even though Alexis — the person who you are crafting these rules to deal with — did not hurt anyone for 9 years after the offense that triggered your response.

    Does this really make sense to you?

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:45 pm

  122. Shades of his complaints about his neighbor:

    http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/17/20535835-navy-yard-shooter-reported-hearing-voices-6-weeks-before-spree-police-say?lite

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:46 pm

  123. DRJ, he should never have been permitted to legally own a weapon again, because he was mentally ill, unstable, AND used the weapon in a criminal, dangerous, malicious and antisocial fashion.

    BOTH/AND.

    I’m not talking about every guy, I’m talking about this guy, then, in that situation.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:48 pm

  124. If so, then I submit you will do anything to avoid certain risks. I feel the same way about people who speed on our city streets and hurt innocent drivers, so I want a zero tolerance policy for any driver who gets a ticket for speeding.

    Take away their license on the first offense, I say. No exceptions. We’ll all be safer with my rule than with yours, because there are a lot more deaths from speeding than from mentally ill mass murderers.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:50 pm

  125. So you want a special rule for Aaron Alexis? Deal.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:50 pm

  126. I’m also saying that mental illness should not, be a reason NOT to pursue charges where there is use of a weapon and a confession.

    In this age where treatment can not otherwise be forced ,and in which medical professionals feel bound or are bound to conceal not only consultation for concerns, but active, florid mental illness, from people who have a need to know, how else are they to be barred from weapons ownership, and kept away from employment where a security clearance is necessary?

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:54 pm

  127. 117 – coughing, with tears in my eyes funny.
    thanks, daleyrocks.

    Comment by mg (31009b) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:58 pm

  128. Sarahw,

    Again, let’s summarize: You claim Alexis was mentally ill because he claimed to have PTSD — not unlike many 9/11 rescuers may have claimed — and he committed an act of violence.

    In addition, you’ve decided the Seattle prosecutor deliberately declined to prosecute Alexis because of leniency for his PTSD claim. Show me where the Seattle prosecutor said that.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:00 pm

  129. “Take away their license on the first offense, I say. No exceptions. We’ll all be safer with my rule than with yours, because there are a lot more deaths from speeding than from mentally ill mass murderers.”

    That’s not a reasonable comparison. If you want to say someone driving drunk should be not only charged for DUI but tried, if he hits someone driving drunk, that would be closer to what I suggest.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:03 pm

  130. It’s reasonable to me.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:04 pm

  131. Oh, and here’s what the Seattle prosecutors said about the Alexis case:

    Police referred the case to what they described in paperwork as Seattle Municipal Court.

    But the Seattle City Attorney’s Office said Monday that it never received a police report documenting the malicious mischief.

    “Thus, we didn’t review it for possible charges,” spokeswoman Kimberly Mills said in an email.

    Leniency had nothing to do with it.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:06 pm

  132. Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:48 pm

    The fault lies with the mental-health “professionals” who object, and refuse, to report individuals such as Alexis (and the VaTech shooter) to the justice system for inclusion in the NICS data base (and the LEO’s who just sweep these reports casually aside – Aurora CO – and not enter them).
    It is the gun industry itself that is screaming for this to change (see remarks by both NSSF and NRA on changes to NICS).

    Comment by askeptic (b8ab92) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:11 pm

  133. Most cities have victim’s advocates who deal with crimes. One of the things they do is try to help victim’s get restitution. This may have been handled that way, as a kind of mediation. Or it may have dropped through the cracks. That’s another reason not to make the criminal justice system the “answer” for mental illness. It’s not set up for that and would do a poor job.

    Maybe families and health care providers would do a poor job, too, but in theory they would do a better job if they care about their family member/patient and want to help him avoid misery like this. If nothing else, they want to avoid bringing misery like this on themselves.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:14 pm

  134. DRJ, the confessed crime alone was serious enough to attempt conviction, IMO. His mental state was reason to be more concerned about future danger, not less so.

    The inference that his dad’s PTSD excuses had any effect at all is my own, but I think a reasonable one based on the fact that the charges went away with a Dad actively interceding with that story of trouble, an implication that the family was “on it” and that restitution would be made.

    All I’m saying is if that is so, it was a mistake.
    Well, I’m also saying I think it was so. And it was a mistake.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:16 pm

  135. 131 DRJ, It’s a little more complicated and mysterious than that.

    http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2021839004_shooterseattlexml.html

    Police said in a news release Monday they referred the case to Seattle Municipal Court — although it is the City Attorney’s Office, not the court, that handles misdemeanor charging decisions.

    The Seattle City Attorney’s Office said Monday that it never received a police report documenting the malicious mischief.

    “Thus, we didn’t review it for possible charges,” spokeswoman Kimberly Mills said in an email.

    The malicious-mischief case appears in a public database maintained by King County District Court, which handles misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor cases. An entry, however, states that the file was deleted a year later, on June 7, 2005, and there are no records available for viewing.

    After his arrest, Alexis made a first appearance in court on June 4, 2004, handled by the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office, said Dan Donohoe, a spokesman for the office. At the hearing, Alexis was released on his personal recognizance with conditions, Donohoe said.

    Alexis appeared in court again three days later but was released when no charges were referred by Seattle police to the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office, which normally handles felony charging decisions.

    Seattle police did not provide further explanation Monday.

    Why the charges were not referred is a mystery.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:21 pm

  136. DRJ, we can agree the criminal justice system is not “the answer” for mental illness.

    It’s just the main cowcatcher right now.

    If we agree on anything we agree it shouldn’t be like that.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:24 pm

  137. When someone feels like a loser and is depressed and wants to end his life, why doesn’t he just seek a quiet room somewhere and blow his brains out? Why involve innocent people that had so much to live for? Is there a part of suicidal feelings that seeks company in death?

    Comment by The Emperor (890cff) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:24 pm

  138. Sarahw,

    It doesn’t seem that mysterious to me. The complaining witness probably didn’t want to show up and only wanted restitution, which was arranged so charges were dropped. That’s how things work for cases like this. I know you disagree and that’s fine, but go back and deal with my recitation of the rules that have to exist if we adopt your approach. Do you see any problem with them?

    What if Alexis and his family honestly thought he simply had PTSD in 2004? As you note, his condition could have worsened through the years but his behavior didn’t really escalate, did it? But even if you are right about Alexis’ medical condition and what should have happened in 2004 …

    The 2004 charges were misdemeanors and even a conviction would not have affected Alexis’ right to own a gun. It wouldn’t have made any difference.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:29 pm

  139. 75.Happy terrorists’ day motherf*ckers!! Lol!!!

    Comment by The Emperor (d356d4) — 9/11/2013 @ 6:05 am

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:33 pm

  140. The Emperor, what? And miss out on having one’s name in all the newspapers?

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:51 pm

  141. When someone feels like a loser and is depressed and wants to end his life, why doesn’t he just seek a quiet room somewhere and blow his brains out? Why involve innocent people that had so much to live for? Is there a part of suicidal feelings that seeks company in death?

    Hey Limperor, we’ve been asking the same thing about your stalking Aaron.

    Comment by gungrabbiest (f7d5ba) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:55 pm

  142. @SPQR. Lol!

    Comment by The Emperor (fc6588) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:02 pm

  143. Comment by gungrabbiest (f7d5ba) — 9/17/2013 @ 3:55 pm
    Who is Aaron? Projecting, yes?

    Comment by The Emperor (fc6588) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:05 pm

  144. I don’t know Emperor, but this guy felt persecuted and had that avenging spirit. He wanted to “get” his enemies.

    Askeptic, why are they so reluctant? It’s amazing to me that despite the police report and the direct warning of Rhode Island police to the naval base, and Alexis’s treatment for apparently very fulminant symptoms, that he could buy that shotgun and shells on the 15th and 16th of this month.

    I mean forget 2004 and 2010 and anything at all that had ever gone before. This guy was cracking up, obviously paranoid and delusional, and actually being treated by a psychiatrist.

    But he was able to buy the shotgun and the shells.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:07 pm

  145. Is that a Jeopardy answer?

    Comment by gungrabbiest (f7d5ba) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:08 pm

  146. @SPQR. You have a point there, the media coverage being given this fool will do nothing but inspire others like him who are desperate to be on CNN. Is it possible that the coverage can be done without any mention of him? It is almost as though he is a hero or something.

    Comment by The Emperor (98014f) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:11 pm

  147. Sarahw, except for California if a piece of stupid legislation is implemented, there is no background check for individual ammunition sales.

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:11 pm

  148. Sarahw, knowing that you know my health issues, I wonder if I should tell you that I can make this shotgun in about three minutes. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_KfHLlSnQc

    (Might need twenty minutes to pick up the parts at Home Depot — I walk slow.)

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:12 pm

  149. NK, impressive. I have never tried to Mcgyvver myself a shotgun.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:16 pm

  150. @nk. Sorry to hear about your health issues. Despite our differences I do wish you the best.

    Comment by The Emperor (98014f) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:16 pm

  151. SPQR I’m thinking maybe this guy shouldn’t have been free to walk around home depot in his current state -That he should have been in a cozy place with therapeutic kittens and free slippers.

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:18 pm

  152. The Emperor asked:

    When someone feels like a loser and is depressed and wants to end his life, why doesn’t he just seek a quiet room somewhere and blow his brains out? Why involve innocent people that had so much to live for? Is there a part of suicidal feelings that seeks company in death?

    Now everybody knows his name and who he was. And if most of us will forget it soon enough, there are 12 families which will never forget.

    A little twerp who never did anything of note in his entire life has done something of note in his death.

    Comment by The sickened Dana (af9ec3) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:21 pm

  153. 148 – That Barry is A-OK with me. Thanks, nk.

    Comment by mg (31009b) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:22 pm

  154. Comment by The sickened Dana (af9ec3) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:21 pm

    I am also sickened by this. Outraged.

    Comment by The Emperor (3db71b) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:33 pm

  155. So the federal government failed to take note of multiple previous weapons related offenses, and mental illness during a background check for a security clearance.

    And somehow I am supposed to feel safe knowing that the same government “cleared” the TSA workers at the airports?

    This guy should never have had a clearance. He should have done some time for his multiple weapons offenses and he should not have been hired as a contractor on a military facility.

    I really think it is time to think about emigration. Costa Rica and New Zealand and Australia are supposed to be nice places. But I’ll have to learn Zealand or some other difficult language…

    Comment by WarEagle82 (2b7355) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:34 pm

  156. Nk – this guy is thought to have gotten his shotgun onto the base in pieces, and then assembled it in the men’s room.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/17/navy-yard-shooting-aaron-alexis-washington/2824793/

    Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:45 pm

  157. No need to feel despondent here, there will never be a perfect system. As long as humans are involved there will always be human error. Yes this could have been prevented and I blame the folks who gave him the clearance without proper background checks. But this could have happened some other way still. While we mourn over this loss and system failure let us be thankful that America is still the safest place to live. Let us celebrate the millions of mass deaths that are prevented every day.

    Comment by The Emperor (4efdcc) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:49 pm

  158. It doesn’t say what kind of shotgun. Doesn’t really matter, they’re all made to be disassembled for cleaning, but a break-open is as easy as opening and closing a child-proof medicine bottle.

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:53 pm

  159. nk, I’ve seen reports that it was a Remington 870 but I’m not sure how reliable that report is.

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:54 pm

  160. #137… what’s stopping you, Chimperor? the Triumph of teh Will???

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (fab4a5) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:57 pm

  161. Ironically, he was barred from buying an AR -15 by state law, had to settle for the shotgun,

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/17/2013 @ 5:23 pm

  162. 66. I have no first hand experience with military clearances so I have a hard time understanding what “secret “clearance” means or why some one of his caliber (no apparent specialized education or experience and a low level rank when in the military) would be given one. Could his ability to speak Thai be a reason? Or what else?

    Comment by elissa (bf3931) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:34 am

    I know others have offered feedback, but there are two types of classified information. One is called general service, which is usually abbreviated GENSER. That can be classified at the Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret levels.

    I have never seen Top Secret GENSER; It exists but I don’t even know what would fall into that category.

    GENSER can be protected at a lower level of security (except TS GENSER, which I know has its own requirements but I’m totally unfamiliar with). Also there isn’t a need-to-know condition of use. So clearance is enough to gain access. A.A. would have had a Secret clearance because some of the systems he’d work on as an Electricians Mate would have had classified components. Also the schematics, repair manuals, etc., would have been classified as well. You can keep GENSER in an approved safe in a regular office, and cleared individuals (who would be almost anyone) would be able to read the documents or log onto the system in their office.

    Apparently he was hired by the contractor to work on the Navy Marine Corps Intranet. AFAIK, that operates only on the unclassified level or NIPRNET (Non-classified Ineternet Protocol Router Network). Of course he may have had to be eligible to work on the SIPRNET, which is the same thing just replace “Non-classified” with “Secret” to compose the acronym. Systems are always classified at the highest level of information they can access, so you could look at Confidential information on this system.

    A security officer could confirm your clearance, and then you’d have access to GENSER information.

    The second type of information is called Sensitive Compartmented Information. This is always classified at the Top Secret level. Here you must not only have a Top Secret clearance, but you must have need-to-know. In other words, with this type of information clearance plus need-to-know equals access. Which means you have to be in a billet where you’re required to know information in that compartment and you’ve been read into the special security requirements and general parameters of the program.

    It’s at this level things get complicated. You can be read into a compartment at one job, and when you leave for a different assignment you’re read out. That’s when you sign the NDAs, as it were. You can only access this information in what’s known as a SCIF, or Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility. Often you can only access information belonging to a particular compartment in one controlled area of the SCIF. It’s a security breach to bring documents belonging to that compartment to other areas of the SCIF. Also, that different assignment may mean you’re still working in the same SCIF. But your former coworkers can’t talk to you anymore about the old program, and you may have been read into new compartments that likewise you can’t talk to them about.

    Here you have a Special Security Officer. They can confirm you have a TS/SCI clearance. But again that isn’t enough to gain access. If you’re visiting a command that command’s SSO can’t confirm what compartments you’re read into. Your own command’s SSO has to forward that information before you’ll be allowed access.

    Really, not too much of this information is all that interesting.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 5:50 pm

  163. No one of consequence tires of your comments, DRJ.

    I really think it is time to think about emigration. Costa Rica and New Zealand and Australia are supposed to be nice places. But I’ll have to learn Zealand or some other difficult language…
    Comment by WarEagle82 (2b7355) — 9/17/2013 @ 4:34 pm

    Costa Rica is very nice, lived there for 4 months once…
    years ago in the midst of some confluence of personal and societal lunacy I joked to some friends about moving to NZ, as they seemed to never have any trouble…
    the following week there was race-related violence and killing there…

    Billy Graham always told people that if they ever found the perfect church to not join it, as it would no longer be perfect once the imperfect person joined. I guess the same could be said for societies.

    Unfortunately the overlap between policy, law, and medicine has made it difficult to make sure that some people who need it the most don’t get it.
    Like Sarahw said, at times what people think may be “kind” in “taking things into account” takes the form of letting people get away with stuff instead of making sure they get what they need.

    As a specific practical matter, perhaps, would be to stop making a big deal of a killer’s name. Let all of the news agencies talk about “the killer”, “the murderer”, instead of giving them notoriety. Certainly not “the” answer or the only response, but some experts say it would help.

    Some of it is perception. As said before, we never hear about the times when possession of a firearm stopped a crime, or the fear that a potential victim has a weapon deters a crime.
    And the way news is reported it always seems that whatever terrible things happened in a land of over 300 million people always happened just down the street.

    Of course it is terrible and unspeakably tragic for those who lost family members and loved ones. But as said before, how many times a year does the equivalent of this happen among the youth of Chicago. If the national news went as wild over every 13th murder in Chicago I don’t know what would happen.

    Comment by MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/17/2013 @ 5:50 pm

  164. http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/dcid.htm

    I’m not giving away anything here; I put up a link to the old DCIDs or Director of Central Intelligence Directives that give much more detail than I have.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 5:55 pm

  165. If I understand correctly, the general area is very mixed in what buildings are general use vs. restricted, and how he gained access to some areas was by killing a security guard whose last thought about being at risk for a deadly confrontation was probably long ago.

    Comment by MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/17/2013 @ 5:56 pm

  166. @124 If so, then I submit you will do anything to avoid certain risks. I feel the same way about people who speed on our city streets and hurt innocent drivers, so I want a zero tolerance policy for any driver who gets a ticket for speeding.

    Take away their license on the first offense, I say. No exceptions. We’ll all be safer with my rule than with yours, because there are a lot more deaths from speeding than from mentally ill mass murderers.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:50 pm

    DRJ, come on now (lol.) The same could be said with jaywalking — first offense, no more walking, for life… ;-)

    Okay, degree and severity are obviously missing, with that said: discharging a firearm — unlawfully and in a fit of anger –in order to deliberately inflict harm or damage is quite different than being late to drop-off the kids at school.

    Given limited resources, no doubt that there is a genuine difference between what is and is not “worthy” of prosecution. IMV, it seems the judicial system really needs to reprise against “mild” firearm crimes a bit more aggressively — realizing that someone who does this probably has less inhibition shooting, say, a person compared to someone with greater self-discipline (ie, a reasonable person.)

    In an open society, a person who abuses his rights can expect to have them suspended indefinitely. That should be especially true with a person unlawfully shooting firearms, regardless of mental capacity.

    * Unlawfully discharging a firearm is a crime.
    * The perpetrator of that crime should be prosecuted (fine or jail, depending on severity.)
    * The subsequent record should be more than enough to disqualify the perpetrator from a security clearance (at least.)

    Mental illness, in its millions of interpretations, ought to be irrelevant if someone uses a firearm because of “rage.” If that person is cognizant enough to use a firearm to express his rage, then he is rational enough to be held accountable for his actions, IMHO.

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:17 pm

  167. Referring to AA’s 2004 case.

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:20 pm

  168. #21 I read the police report and said bogus!
    They said when they went to Alexis apt. the gun was disassmbelled and covered in gun oil and they said this corroborated Alexis’ story of it went off during cleaning. WHAT!!?? Either the gun took itself apart after firing through the ceiling or Alexis did……neither possibility is corroboration

    Comment by Angelo (fb37d8) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:32 pm

  169. @162 Also there isn’t a need-to-know condition of use.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 5:50 pm

    Steve, a secret security clearance did have a need-to-know requirement. IIRC, it had three conditions of use:
    1. Appropriate security level
    2. Need-to-know
    3. Authorization

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:33 pm

  170. Pons Asinorum,

    I agree with taking firearm offenses seriously. I don’t agree with treating firearm offenses differently if the person charged was also mad, hateful or mentally ill — so I guess that tells you how I feel about hate crimes.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:36 pm

  171. I know you do.
    Me too.
    Me too.

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:40 pm

  172. It occurs to me that Aaron Alexis is exhibit A in my theory that liberals intend to construct a dysfunctional society.

    Following their successful efforts to neuter involuntary commitment laws, they now demand that society as a whole become the new rubber room.

    I don’t mean to be insensitive to the mentally ill. As far as I’m concerned there should be no more stigma attached to mental illness than any other illness.

    But after insisting that untreated or unsuccessfully treated seriously mentally ill live among us, they are now insisting that we all live by the same rules as the lowest common denominator so to speak. If Alexis can’t be trusted with a gun no one should be.

    Perhaps I’m excessively cynical. But it isn’t original of me to note that the Dianne Feinsteins of the world have made this into a battle of emotions. Who cares more about people? And they’d rather have people like A.A. running around committing crimes like the one at the Navy Yard yesterday as cannon gun control fodder than to do something meaningful about the mentally ill. Whom we must not stigmatize as they go around demonizing gun owners.

    It isn’t like this hasn’t happened before. Certain pols around the world have figured out that by giving violent criminals free rein along with disarming the populace they create a clientele clamoring for more government to protect them. Job security. It’s a cynical use of people, and I’m just cynical enough to suspect it of them.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:42 pm

  173. http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-hunter/hoyer-compares-hostage-taking-debt-limit-fight

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:48 pm

  174. If Obama had a son…

    Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:48 pm

  175. This could have been Obama seventeen years ago.

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:51 pm

  176. The SCOAMF said that after the verdict.

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:52 pm

  177. Pons Asinorum @169, I was speaking of the two different types of information. Clearance alone isn’t enough to access TS/SCI information. One must have a valid need to know to have access. You may have a TS/SCI clearance, but you can only access information in the compartments you’ve been read into.

    Which makes it a different beast from GENSER information. Clearance essentially equals access. If you’ve got the clearance, you can access the command’s entire classified library.

    When I mentioned a “condition of use” I meant of the information, not the clearance.

    Perhaps my effort confused more than it helped.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:53 pm

  178. –The fault lies with the mental-health “professionals” who object, and refuse, to report individuals such as Alexis

    We have an A number one mess on our hands. I was in the mental health field years ago and there are lots of things to consider.

    We dumped our facilities for the mentally ill in the 60′s and 70′s. The crime rate escalated. Now a very significant percentage of prisoners in the penitentiary are mentally ill – and get no treatment.

    At the same time we all suffer from these terrible, mental illness driven events like Sandy Hook, Gabby Giffords.

    There has to be some middle ground between a family can’t get her son committed even though he’s clearly psychotic and threatening (Adam Lanza, Jared Loughner and now what’s his name) and a mental health police state.

    Comment by red (ac28a9) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:55 pm

  179. *you can access the command’s entire GENSER classified library.*

    Which is all that nearly all commands have unless they have an intelligence mission.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:55 pm

  180. Warning signs, shmorning signs!

    Comment by Icy (6bf2f9) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:56 pm

  181. But it isn’t original of me to note that the Dianne Feinsteins of the world have made this into a battle of emotions. Who cares more about people? And they’d rather have people like A.A. running around committing crimes like the one at the Navy Yard yesterday as cannon gun control fodder than to do something meaningful about the mentally ill. —

    Exactly

    Comment by red (ac28a9) — 9/17/2013 @ 6:57 pm

  182. Got it, thanks Steve.

    You were quite clear, it was my comprehension skills at fault.

    I had never heard of GENSER, but that makes sense from a management/efficiency POV.

    Thank you for the information Steve.

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:01 pm

  183. It occurs to me that Aaron Alexis is exhibit A in my theory that liberals intend to construct a dysfunctional society.

    Speaking of ideology, I’d be surprised if people haven’t encountered the following bit of information, certainly since it’s posted rather prominently at the drudgereport.com.

    breitbart.com: [Michael] Ritrovato went on to explain that two of them had a close relationship based in part on their differences, specifically race and politics. Alexis was black, Ritrovato is white. Ritrovato described himself as conservative and Alexis is “more of a liberal type” who supported Barack Obama:

    “…Aaron wasn’t conservative like I am. He was more of a liberal type; he wasn’t happy with the former [Bush] administration. He was more happy with this [the Obama] administration — as far as presidential administrations.”

    Ritrovato said that Alexis’ fondness for “violent video games” was the only red flag he saw in retrospect.

    I recall the mass killer in Arizona in 2011, Jared Loughner, was originally mistakenly identified (not sure if it was by CNN or ABC, or some other network) with another person in the Phoenix area named Loughner. But it turned out the actual murderer was, as described by his high-school classmates, a liberal.

    I sometimes wonder if my stereotypes of the liberal mind are overly harsh, and in the case of Alexis, I actually mused at the outset that his ties to the military perhaps might translate into his not being a garden-variety liberal.

    Bzzzzt. Wrong.

    Comment by Mark (58ea35) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:15 pm

  184. almost fitting… http://youtu.be/imiFk2J4Dkk

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (fab4a5) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:15 pm

  185. FWIW, I didn’t follow through with a very ironic observation in my previous post, succeeding the part that went…

    …mistakenly identified (not sure if it was by CNN or ABC, or some other network) with another person in the Phoenix area named Loughner.

    I omitted:

    …who was associated with the Tea Party, or something of that nature.

    Comment by Mark (58ea35) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:22 pm

  186. 114. Comment by Sarahw (b0e533) — 9/17/2013 @ 2:27 pm

    I submit the ones who shoot their guns when very put out, who imagine others mock, belittle or target them,

    I read it over, and ot seems to me maybe he wasn’t lying about being mocked – he was really mocked and belittled that day, when he claimed something was wrong with his car, and that somebody had done it deliberately to him (to shut him up)

    Perhaps that did trigger it, and it wasn’t just simply he wanted to stop them from taking up parking spaces.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:38 pm

  187. 161. Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/17/2013 @ 5:23 pm

    Ironically, he was barred from buying an AR -15 by state law, had to settle for the shotgun,

    So, that would explain why he had rented sn AR-15 (practice and preparation) but then found out he couldn’t use it to commit his killing spree.

    He didn’t postpone his killing spree because he was soon scheduled to start working, and the only reason he took the job was so he could kill a lot of Navy-related people.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:46 pm

  188. You were quite clear, it was my comprehension skills at fault.

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:01 pm

    I’m not quit buying that, as you have excellent comprehension skills.

    I thought I could clarify things by observing the distinction between GENSER or general service information that just requires a straight secret clearance for access and special access program information that requires a TS/SCI clearance plus a validated job requirement to access.

    The former just requiring a check of local, state, and federal law enforcement agency records to qualify for, the latter an extensive background investigation including face-to-face interviews.

    But I’m afraid I mucked it up. It seemed clear enough at the time.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:46 pm

  189. I agree with Sarahw and disagree with DRJ, if you shoot up someone’s car you should lose the right to legally own a gun. If this isn’t current law the law should be changed. I expect the failure to prosecute the case was a mistake, if not the policy that allows such cases to be dropped should be changed.

    Comment by James B. Shearer (94136b) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:51 pm

  190. 186. …I read it over, and ot seems to me maybe he wasn’t lying about being mocked – he was really mocked and belittled that day, when he claimed something was wrong with his car, and that somebody had done it deliberately to him (to shut him up)

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:38 pm

    So why didn’t he just put a tarantula in their porta-potty like I did?

    Just kidding. I have no idea how the tarantula ended up in the porta-potty on the construction site whose workers would eat lunch sitting on the hood of my car if I wasn’t around.

    Should there have been a tarantula.

    Besides, tarantulas occur naturally in the area.

    The statute of limitations has run out, anyway. And I was a minor.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:55 pm

  191. #172

    Agree.

    Comment by Angelo (fb37d8) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:58 pm

  192. “BRIAN ROSS HARDEST HIT: Friend Says Navy Yard Shooter Was An Obama Supporter.”

    Posted at 10:20 pm by Glenn Reynolds

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (2bcc2f) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:59 pm

  193. Also, maybe it was that he couldn’t take the vibrations he was feeling inside his body any more (which might have been as real as tinnitus or phantom limb pain, and which was making it difficult for him to sleep) and blamed the Navy for unleashing it on him, because who else would have such a machine that could do that?

    (He knew some people in the Navy didn’t like him -they’d forced him out of the Navy Reserves, and even attempted to give him a less than honorable discharge.)

    And he had probably heard of microwaves causing vibrations.

    http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/cesium.html

    A cesium clock operates by exposing cesium atoms to microwaves until they vibrate at one of their resonant frequencies and then counting the corresponding cycles as a measure of time.

    http://www.examiner.com/article/author-u-s-navy-destroying-dolphins-whales-attacking-earth-s-life-frequency

    The effects of the U.S. Navy sonar targeting, which may be far beyond weapons testing into operational targeting and genocide of cetaceans, is to lower the vibrational field of the Earth and slow its elevation and transition into a more evolved dimension.

    There’s probably other wrong stuff out there.

    He wasn’t educated enough to realize that what he was proposing was impossible. He went to VA and didn’t get any better explanation.

    Sarahw: Who think they are using microwave machines to send vibrations through the ceiling

    What are you going to do – attribute this thing to him never having learned enough physics to know this was wrong? Because that’s the only thing that makes this crazy. His thinking should not be simply dismissed as the ravings of a crazy man. It would only be crazy if he was famliar with physics.

    He’d gone to VA doctors and they hadn’t even told him it was all in his head, but rather that he was imagining things, but he wasn’t.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:07 pm

  194. One thing: Wth 20-20 hindsight, there’s a number of different ways this could have been prevented, and anyone can pick their favorite.

    My favorite is basic character.

    This is more important than any mistaken ideas he may have had.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:12 pm

  195. He’d gone to VA doctors and they hadn’t even told him it was all in his head…

    How do you tell a mentally ill person they’re only imagining things when they believe those things are real?

    Don’t you at least want them to trust you?

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:23 pm

  196. 189. Comment by James B. Shearer (94136b) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:51 pm

    I agree with Sarahw and disagree with DRJ, if you shoot up someone’s car you should lose the right to legally own a gun.

    What if somebody uses a nail to damage tires? Should that deprive him of the right to own a gun, or maybe a car – because you can endanger someone’s life with a car – or maybe just nails, because that’s what he used?

    Maybe it’s thhat it is misuse of a gun?

    I think here anyway the more serious thing was firing that gun into the ceiling to scare that woman. That could have killed someone. In the other case he knew the difference betweeen hurting someone and damaging property.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:23 pm

  197. SF: He’d gone to VA doctors and they hadn’t even told him it was all in his head…

    I assume.

    Because they probably didn’t take the idea seriously.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:23 pm

    How do you tell a mentally ill person they’re only imagining things when they believe those things are real?

    Oh, but the thing is they are real. You just have to explain that this like a dream, except that it’s happening while a person is awake. And that’s the principle thing wrong with him.

    Don’t you at least want them to trust you?

    It helps to actually understand what is happening, and they probably didn’t.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:27 pm

  198. I agree with Sarahw and disagree with DRJ, if you shoot up someone’s car you should lose the right to legally own a gun.

    I have to be the third wheel here and suggest that no one should lose any rights without due process of law.

    What we have now is in New York state patients who’ve not been adjudicated a danger to anyone are having the state police confiscate their firearms merely because their doctors prescribed anti-anxiety medication.

    Meanwhile, Aaron Alexis keeps his clearance despite the voices.

    It seems to me a system rife for abuse.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:31 pm

  199. 196. …That could have killed someone. In the other case he knew the difference betweeen hurting someone and damaging property.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:23 pm

    There is no difference. A gun is deadly force all the time. If a bullet passes through your intended target and hits an unintended target you’re 100% responsible.

    The idea that one only intended property damage but caused human damage when illegally discharging a firearm is a non starter.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:36 pm

  200. When someone says they feel like they have bugs crawling on their skin, doctors take it seriously. Not that there are bugs there, but that they feel it. And maybe they can figure out a way to stop that.

    When someone complains of pain, even in a missing limb, doctors tske it seriously…and attempt to eliminate it.

    When someone complains of hearing noises or music, doctors take it seriously. Not that they can do mch about it, but they know there’s a neurological problem.

    But when someone complains of various kinds of feelings inside their head and offers the explanation that some kind of broadcasting is causing it, or when someone tells of voices or hallucinations, they think their thinking is all disordered.

    Little wonder their conclusions wander further from reality sometimes.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:39 pm

  201. “I’m sure everyone is tired of my comments. What do you think, Mike K? What is the best way to handle mental health issues like this?

    Comment by DRJ”

    Lots of comments. I only come by from time to time. The only solution is to go back to the system of taking psychotics off the streets and confining them unless they take their meds. We have gotten into a box with the civil right to be crazy.

    Families of psychotics are begging for help. The homeless problem appeared with the “deinstitutionalization” movement of the late 60s. The mental hospitals were emptied with the myth of community care. Governors, like Reagan in California, saw budget cuts. The outpatient treatment never happened. It was too expensive.

    Two movies drove the public discussion, “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” and “Snakepit.” Neither was true but they convinced the public.

    It will be tough to ever get sanity (sorry for the pun) back into the discussion.

    Comment by MikeK (dc6ffe) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:45 pm

  202. Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:36 pm

    A gun is deadly force all the time. If a bullet passes through your intended target and hits an unintended target you’re 100% responsible.

    The idea that one only intended property damage but caused human damage when illegally discharging a firearm is a non starter.

    If we are talking about danger, it’s any kind of non-careful use of a gun, even to play a stupid game, or firing it straight up in the air.

    It doesn’t have to be something criminal, just maybe not thinking.

    The firing of the bullets into the car, there was almost no chance if hurting somone. Of course if motivated by anger, as he claimed, that could be a bad sign.

    Overall, maybe, this guy did not care about people and alwsys wanted to get his own way, including when working maybe, but that’s still a long way from going out and deliberately killing a lot of people.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:47 pm

  203. There’s no way of telling who’s going to shoot up a crowd, certainly by a simple formula. If there is a way, it has to do with someone’s reasons for NOT doing it.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:50 pm

  204. 202. If we are talking about danger, it’s any kind of non-careful use of a gun, even to play a stupid game, or firing it straight up in the air.

    It doesn’t have to be something criminal, just maybe not thinking.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:47 pm

    I wasn’t merely speaking of the careless use of firearms. The NYPD can shoot up Times Square and hit everything but the intended target and not be personally liable.

    An armed citizen can not, even in Texas. You’re liable for every bullet that goes down range. Even the most carefully aimed bullet that hits a perpetrator in lawful self defense. If it overpenetrates, goes through the perpetrator, and hits an infant in a stroller, the armed citizen doesn’t have a police union and a city contract behind him.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:01 pm

  205. Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:01 pm

    The NYPD can shoot up Times Square and hit everything but the intended target and not be personally liable.

    You mean the incident that happened this week, which was near if not exactly at, Times Square??

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/bystanders-wounded-midtown-manhattan-shooting-20260375

    And the target was not actually a danger to anyone but just pretending. He took out a metrocard not a gun, and pretended to be aiming it at police they said.

    It all started when he was weaving in and out of traffic, and the police think maybe wrongly, that he was attempting to commit suicide. The police wounded two bystanders. Police Commissioner Raymond Klly is said to be angry at what happened, because this violated their training, not to fire a gun when there is a crowd, risking the lives of others in order to protect themselves. (well they might be protecting otehrs too)

    I would say that at least they still were careful enough not to fire too quickly, and to aim because otherwise they coukld have hurt alot more people.

    I also would say that this is another proof that not even police should have weapons that fire too many bullets too quickly.

    Now about the ase in North Carolina;

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/16/charlotte-north-carolina-car-crash-victim-shot

    It seems like what happened was tghat after a crash, he knocked on someone;s door. a woman answered who was expecting her husband, only it wasn’t, and without hearing him out, she apparently slammed the door and called tghe police.

    A god argument for getting rid of large magazines for almost anyone.

    You’re liable for every bullet that goes down range. Even the most carefully aimed bullet that hits a perpetrator in lawful self defense. If it overpenetrates, goes through the perpetrator, and hits an infant in a stroller, the armed citizen doesn’t have a police union and a city contract behind him.

    I would assume he has civil liability, and that is actually true for a police officer as well, except that the city pays.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:19 pm

  206. I blame Joe Biden. This poor man only bought a shotgun because Joe suggested it.

    Comment by Gus (70b624) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:20 pm

  207. 198

    I have to be the third wheel here and suggest that no one should lose any rights without due process of law.

    Sure he’s entitled to due process but in this case there doesn’t seem to have been much dispute about what happened, he just got a pass for some reason.

    Comment by James B. Shearer (94136b) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:46 pm

  208. 202

    The firing of the bullets into the car, there was almost no chance if hurting somone. Of course if motivated by anger, as he claimed, that could be a bad sign.

    What other possible motives do you have in mind?
    Shooting up a car in the presence of the owner seems to me to be a very hostile and provocative act which has a chance of precipitating a violent confrontation in which someone gets hurt.

    Comment by James B. Shearer (94136b) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:54 pm

  209. If I’m not mistaken, the Navy should have and could have declared A.A. mentally unfit to hold a clearance. No constitutional issues involved. No gun rights. Just a clearance.

    Which could have been a start, as obviously one proved necessary.

    We’re not the only ones who can’t catch them all, if that’s any consolation:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-13014640

    Royal Navy crewman killed in HMS Astute sub shooting

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:58 pm

  210. 205. …I would assume he has civil liability, and that is actually true for a police officer as well, except that the city pays.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 9:19 pm

    You would assume wrong. A cop gets an attorney and insurance simply because he’s a dues paying member.

    Also a cop can get official immunity.

    All these things are either something a private citizen has to pay for or is unavailable at any price.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:01 pm

  211. The DEAD shooter had a govt clearance, a PASS to be on a MILITARY INSTALLATION, he had a record of firearms discharge and mental health concerns, and he had a JOE BIDEN (that’s a SHOTGUN). He committed this heinous act with a SHOTGUN. Shall we ban SHOTGUNS? Shall we ban PRIUS DRIVING LIBERAL BLACK MEN WHO SUPPORT OBAMA from possessing SHOTGUNS??
    Let’s hear it folks. Let’s hear the solution to this!!!

    Comment by Gus (70b624) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:08 pm

  212. @196 What if somebody uses a nail to damage tires?

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (04483b) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:23 pm

    It’s called vandalism.

    Should that deprive him of the right to own a gun, or maybe a car…

    Depends on his record. If it is chalk full of violations, then IMHO and upon conviction, he has proven that he is to irresponsible to have a firearm and will likely use that right to hurt someone (to me, it should be statistically driven.) If, upon conviction, his record does not justify such a penalty, then no.

    – because you can endanger someone’s life with a car…

    Driving is a privilege and not a right, but the logic in terms of balancing danger and penalty is the same as above.

    – or maybe just nails, because that’s what he used?

    Using a nail rather than a firearm to express his anger would demonstrate someone with at least a sense of bounds and therefore should not be punished to the same degree as someone who does the same crime, but with a pistol. Of course, if he has a record full of such instances, then certainly suspension of his right to bear firearms can be considered.

    Maybe it’s thhat it is misuse of a gun?

    Uh, yeah, safe bet.

    I think here anyway the more serious thing was firing that gun into the ceiling to scare that woman.

    Me too.

    That could have killed someone. In the other case he knew the difference betweeen hurting someone and damaging property.

    Re the car: that is not clear. He either planned the incident with the car so no one would be in it, or he did not. If the former, then he knownly and deliberately planned on using a firearm when other means were available (how about a nice letter, for instance.) If the latter, he was lucky (as were his would be victims.)

    Assuming Alexis was given due process and subsequently convicted in 2004, he should have had his right to bear arms suspended indefinitely, not because he was mentally ill, but because he demonstrated that he could not properly balance his right to bear arms with his societal responsibly to exercise it in a moral fashion. It does not matter if he was mentally ill — he showed that he does not have the capacity to make that judgement.

    * He broke the law with a firearms violation.
    * He should have been penalized with, at least, restitution and suspension of his right to bear arms.
    * This should have been on his record, which would have disqualified him for any sort of security clearance.

    If a person is cognizant enough to use a firearm in anger, then that person is rational enough to be tried. If convicted, mental illness might be a factor in sentencing, but regardless, that person should never be allowed to legally posses firearms again — he abused his right, illness or otherwise.

    It’s really not that hard. Now, what to do about people suffering from untreated mental illness in general…tough one.

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:11 pm

  213. Ritrovato said that Alexis’ fondness for “violent video games” was the only red flag he saw in retrospect.
    Dennis Miller makes the point that we have had guns around longer than video games, but that it seems there have been more mass shootings only since video games have become popular.
    I guess it might be true that violent video games of themselves do not cause normal people to become mass murderers, but perhaps when you have someone who has trouble keeping reality and “myth” straight it is a dangerous combination.
    And there is no Constitutional right to have computer games.

    We have had available for some time now several different anti-psychotics that can be given by an injection that can last 2 weeks or 4 weeks. So one could mandate treatment that does not require institutionalization or even daily visits to/by a health care worker.

    In my experience, one of the “best” things that can happen to someone with out of control psychosis is to get TB. Since TB is communicable, the law (at least in PA and I assume similar elsewhere) makes it possible to mandate treatment, even prolonged involuntary hospitalization by court order. I had a few patients whose best months of life were while they were on TB meds, everything else was treated too. One patient did well for a time even after he finished the TB meds in a group home, but he became erratic and disappeared. The next I heard of him was when he was in a jail ward in a hospital after setting a fire, thankfully no one was hurt.

    Comment by MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:13 pm

  214. “A god argument for getting rid of large magazines for almost anyone.”

    I hope that was sarcasm, Sammy. Because if not, you are really making some bizarre arguments in your head.

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:13 pm

  215. I think we’ve seen this before:
    http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/09/a-journalists-guide-to-identifying.html

    Comment by MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:18 pm

  216. It seems like some people think I’m against prosecuting crimes involving firearms. I’m not.

    My objection is to using firearm laws to target people who might have mental health problems. It seems like a dangerous precedent to use gun laws this way. The criminal justice system should punish people for their acts, not their thoughts.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:26 pm

  217. @188 Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:46 pm

    You give me to much credit Steve; thank you.

    @198 I have to be the third wheel here and suggest that no one should lose any rights without due process of law.

    What we have now is in New York state patients who’ve not been adjudicated a danger to anyone are having the state police confiscate their firearms merely because their doctors prescribed anti-anxiety medication.

    Meanwhile, Aaron Alexis keeps his clearance despite the voices.

    It seems to me a system rife for abuse.

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/17/2013 @ 8:31 pm

    The Constitution only gives the courts the authority to remove the rights of a citizen. Giving other agencies the power to take our rights all but guarantees abuse of that power — and further erosion of our rights. We have examples of that with the IRS, NSA, TSA — even in the best light of good intentions, Power always moves to increase itself.

    The right to bear arms is the most sought prize of progressive forces and, to me anyway, that is a greater threat than the small statistical instances of the sad and tragic moments of mentally ill shooters committing mass murder. That could easily be used as a Trojan Horse — the President already has made his gambit (and the graves are still warm, what a guy…)

    They always come for the guns…

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:30 pm

  218. Also, while I sympathize with concerns about the reckless use of guns in public, the law generally treats reckless conduct different than intentional conduct. It also treats property crimes different than crimes against the person. Shooting someone’s car is a serious offense, but not as serious as shooting a person. That’s why Aaron Alexis only faced a misdemeanor charge in 2004 when he shot the construction worker’s car. My guess is that’s the way most state laws would treat an incident like this, unless it was clear he was trying to target a person instead of a car.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:31 pm

  219. @218 Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:31 pm

    Question DRJ, if you would be so kind:

    IMHO, misdemeanor charge is about right for shooting an empty car, but could a penalty include something like suspending his right to bear arms or is that strictly limited to felonies?

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:53 pm

  220. The homeless problem appeared with the “deinstitutionalization” movement of the late 60s.

    That was merely a preview to the social breakdown of this society in general associated with good intentions run amok, and which first began to creep into everything over 40 years ago. Simply put, there are behaviors tolerated and even embraced in public today that would have been unimaginable and totally unexpected in the past.

    People have become increasingly desensitized and shock-proof, and it ain’t gonna get any better in the future, not when ongoing trends favor the tentacle-like reach and dishonesty of political correctness and a casual acceptance of bratty self-entitlement.

    Comment by Mark (58ea35) — 9/17/2013 @ 10:57 pm

  221. Guns and misdemeanors

    Conviction relating to violence upon a person, or domestic violence (which can be throwing a cell phone at a wall)

    Comment by steveg (794291) — 9/17/2013 @ 11:45 pm

  222. Damage to property above a certain amount is a felony. Domestic violence to trigger Lautenberg requires a special finding of dangerousness.

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/18/2013 @ 12:12 am

  223. Or used to.

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/18/2013 @ 12:12 am

  224. Discharging a firearm in the direction of a residence, even if not a particular residence, is a felony in some states. Same with schools. Same with public conveyances and God help you if it’s a school bus.

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/18/2013 @ 12:16 am

  225. The car he shot must have been old. I’m guessing a Subaru. The cops probably suggested they just slap on a couple more bumperstickers to cover up the holes

    Comment by steveg (794291) — 9/18/2013 @ 12:50 am

  226. They called it ‘the E plebnista’

    http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/2013/09/pic-of-day-common-core-takes-on-second.html

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/18/2013 @ 4:06 am

  227. Shooting landspeeder with blaster, to Yoda makes no sense it does not! Use lightsaber Yoda would, easier to put tiny pieces of speeder in recycler it would be! If mad at speeder I was!

    Comment by Yoda (35b482) — 9/18/2013 @ 4:18 am

  228. Captain Kirk you think you are? Well, Yoda knew Captain Kirk, and you are no Captain Kirk, you are not! :lol:

    Comment by Yoda (35b482) — 9/18/2013 @ 4:21 am

  229. “And there is no Constitutional right to have computer games.”

    Perhaps not (although I expect a good Constitutional Lawyer could make one heck of a case), but there IS a Constitutional Right to have the government keep its goddamned nose out of a private citizen’s business. It is enshrined in the 9th and 10th amendments. Granted, both of those have been more or less gutted by the busybodies, but I personally, would like top see that reversed.

    All of this ignores that in a sensible world, where a military base was occupied by armed and trained men, Aaron Alexis would have shot one or two people and then been reduced to doll rags. The problem isn’t guns. The problem isn’t video games. The problem is busybodies interfering with the natural rights of the common citizen to look after his own interests.

    Comment by C. S. P. Schofield (adb9dd) — 9/18/2013 @ 6:50 am

  230. Would this guy have been arrested, locked up and the key thrown away if he were white, republican, and a Detroit Lions fan?

    Comment by PCD (7a7072) — 9/18/2013 @ 10:24 am

  231. There is a Constitutional right to have video games. They are First Amendment speech to the same extent as art, music, and storytelling are First Amendment speech.

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/18/2013 @ 10:54 am

  232. I wonder if the video game angle was brought up, in part, due to the release of GTA V on 9/17 and the upcoming COD: Ghosts release. Seems like a sure way to stir up controversy around two large game franchises as opposed to a real story.

    Alexis hearing voices and reportedly seeing hallucinations (if these reports are accurate) seem more telling on his behavior.

    Comment by ratbeach (f5aad4) — 9/18/2013 @ 10:58 am

  233. If my daughter wants to kill zombies with a diamond pickaxe, it’s between me and her and moralizers can go bark up a tree.

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/18/2013 @ 10:59 am

  234. But I do think GTA ruffles a lot of feathers among both the left and the right “think of the children” crowds.

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/18/2013 @ 11:00 am

  235. 225. Comment by steveg (794291) — 9/18/2013 @ 12:50 am

    The car he shot must have been old. I’m guessing a Subaru. The cops probably suggested they just slap on a couple more bumperstickers to cover up the holes.

    Having “learned his lesson”, this past July he tried damaging a car another way:

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/navy-yard-shooting-suspect-aaron-alexis-allegedly-tampered-with-friend-s-car TPM Livewire
    Navy Yard Shooter Aaron Alexis Allegedly Tampered With Friend’s Car September 17, 2013, 7:31 PM EDT

    Aaron Alexis was accused of tampering with his roommate’s car on July 5 while he was living in Fort Worth, Texas, according to a police report obtained by TPM via a public information request filed with the Fort Worth Police Department.

    According to the report Alexis’ roommate, Nutpisit Suthamtewakul, called police after “experiencing engine problems with his 2013 Honda Accord.” After he pulled the car over, the report said Suthamtewakul saw scratches indicating “someone had used an unknown object to pry open” the door on the fuel tank. The report said Suthamtewakul also described seeing “light traces of some sort of granules inside the fuel door, around the fuel filler tube.”

    Based on this evidence, the report said Suthamtewakul suspected Alexis “put some substance in the fuel tank of the … vehicle to intentionally cause damage.” The report said Suthamtewakul told a police officer that he and his wife had “been having problems” with Alexis that had “escalated to the point that they have made it clear that [Alexis] will need to find somewhere else to live.” It was not immediately clear whether charges were ever filed against Alexis for the alleged tampering.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (628029) — 9/18/2013 @ 11:03 am

  236. Thank you nk and steveg.

    The link steveg supplied @221 is cited law that a misdemeanor can be used to suspend someone’s right to bear arms (on 01/18/12):

    The U.S. Supreme Court turned down a Napa County man’s challenge Tuesday of a California law that imposes a 10-year ban on gun ownership for anyone convicted of a misdemeanor crime involving violence or threats of force.

    Had that been in effect for Alexis in 2004, maybe he would not have been able to legally own a firearm (mental illness not a factor.) Who knows how that might have changed things.

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/18/2013 @ 11:06 am

  237. “Had that been in effect for Alexis in 2004, maybe he would not have been able to legally own a firearm (mental illness not a factor.)”

    PA – If he had be convicted of something, but he wasn’t, and if Washington had adopted the same law that California adopted which is not clear whether it applies to “felony” endangerment of tires.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/18/2013 @ 11:25 am

  238. PCD wrote:

    Would this guy have been arrested, locked up and the key thrown away if he were white, republican, and a Detroit Lions fan?

    If he had been white and a Republican, he wouldn’t be a Detroit Lions fan.

    Comment by The Oakland Raiders fan Dana (3e4784) — 9/18/2013 @ 12:24 pm

  239. @237 Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/18/2013 @ 11:25 am

    All true daley — lots of if’s. Jurisdiction and conviction is what I meant to imply in the phrase: “Had that been in effect for Alexis in 2004… .” I should have worded that better.

    My question was whether or not a penalty for certain misdemeanor crimes might include the suspension of the right to bear arms — and apparently it does in certain jurisdictions (and implied, upon conviction.)

    Re the shooting of tires — as nk commented, it could be a felony in certain jurisdiction given certain proximities to schools, buses, houses, etc; but even as a misdemeanor, here is a guy who decided to shoot at an unoccupied car to express his “rage” to the owner of the car. That is someone who fails his obligation to balance his rights with moral responsibility. He demonstrated that he lacks the ability or restraint to make such judgements.

    My (unbelievably small :-) ) point is that someone like Alexis should not have had a firearm, not because of his mental illness, but because the law could have required it just based on his behavior (implied: conviction, jurisdiction, etc.)

    Why is that so concerning to me? Because if the law in practice could not prevent someone like Alexis from legally owning a firearm based on his 2004 actions, then some other entity would be given the power to make decisions about which people could exercise their rights — and we all where that would lead. Hint: (see IRS, NSA, TSA, etc, etc.)

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/18/2013 @ 12:47 pm

  240. I would like to meet you Daley, and all the other regulars here at Patterico’s; I would just prefer not to do so in some re-education camp, because some low-level bureaucrat in Cleveland decided to have a round-up.

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/18/2013 @ 12:54 pm

  241. “BRIAN ROSS HARDEST HIT: Friend Says Navy Yard Shooter Was An Obama Supporter.”

    Posted at 10:20 pm by Glenn Reynolds

    Comment by Colonel Haiku (2bcc2f) — 9/17/2013 @ 7:59 pm

    It’s ugly to say so, but isn’t this very predictable? He’s trying to kill people in the military, after all. He’s hardly a patriot, and which side of the political spectrum does this put him on?

    For a long time I’ve said that we need to treat these killers as crazies who are isolated completely from their politics, but I’ve seen so much agitprop from the left against our country that I think that a little association is probably justifiable.

    Comment by Dustin (303dca) — 9/18/2013 @ 12:55 pm

  242. We always have to be on the lookout for people who feel that their sense of victimhood entitles them to our personal freedoms.

    Comment by nk (875f57) — 9/18/2013 @ 12:59 pm

  243. “All true daley — lots of if’s.”

    PA – Exactly. I understood your point. My point is we can’t rewrite history, much as many liberals would like.

    To paraphrase JD, if my aunt had nuts, she would be my uncle.

    So Aaron Alexis, like many mass killers, turns out to be a nutjob. After the fact we find out there were many clues pointing in that direction. Which clue should have prevented him from owning a gun or getting a security clearance?

    No clear answer. No convictions on his record. Property damage with a gun? Negligent discharge while cleaning weapon?

    Certainly the voices in the head incident in Rhode Island was a red flag but even that would most likely not have led to involuntary commitment since there is no indication he was endangering anyone or himself and was also probably to close to the Navy Yard shooting to have filtered through any inquiries, if any, the Navy was making after being warned by the police.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/18/2013 @ 1:41 pm

  244. Everybody should take a minute to read about Edward Hambrick. This is not directly related to the navy yard shooting and Hambrick is not nuts. But his story illuminates the difference in how gun owners have been treated jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

    Edward Hambrick has already spent more time behind bars at the Cook County Jail than some who’ve been convicted of violent crimes. His case began 26 months ago, when he said he left Pierre, South Dakota, where he’d been working as a computer programmer, to return to his native Englewood for a 20th high school class reunion.

    http://www.myfoxchicago.com/story/23447982/dozens-in-jail-for-illegal-gun-possession-expected-to-be-released

    Comment by elissa (bf3931) — 9/18/2013 @ 2:34 pm

  245. @243 After the fact we find out there were many clues pointing in that direction. Which clue should have prevented him from owning a gun or getting a security clearance?

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/18/2013 @ 1:41 pm

    Yeah, that is the big enchilada, which is why I was making an “unbelievably small” point and was playing in IF- land (IF Alexis was convicted, COULD he have been prevented from owning a fire arm…). Without a conviction, what do we do — the right to bear arms is inviolate without due process, which means a mentally ill person who has not violated the law can legally own firearms.

    So, yeah, the big enchilada, what are the options?

    I think from a unitarian POV, the greater good is preserving the Constitution (incidence of mentally ill using firearms to kill people is quite low, I’ll offer that without proof) therefore, I do not accept any involuntary solution without due process. At the end of the day, we are a free society. Our system and laws are not preventive, but reactive.

    With that said, some thoughts:
    * Increased voluntary treatment and a voluntary, but legally binding way to suspend right to bear arms.
    * Increased involuntary treatment and suspension of right to bear arms (after due process, part of penalty.)
    * A more aggressive judicial regarding firearm offenses. Upon conviction, even for a misdemeanor, the right to bear arms can be suspended under certain circumstance, like the law sourced by steveg, above.

    The idea is that each point will reduce the incidence of mentally ill/firearms violence, making a small number even smaller. Getting it to zero though, without breaking our Constitution, I dunno.

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/18/2013 @ 2:38 pm

  246. To paraphrase JD, if my aunt had nuts, she would be my uncle.

    That is is a good one, Daley! My favorite JD’ism: “Colorblind is racist.”

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/18/2013 @ 2:58 pm

  247. It was a bug not a feature, re Taranto;

    The IG report specifically found that 52 felons had received unauthorized access to military facilities for 62 to 1,035 days. It said this had placed “military personnel, dependents, civilians, and installations at an increased security risk.”

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/18/2013 @ 2:59 pm

  248. What’s the latest? Aaron still dead?

    Comment by The Emperor (9ae02a) — 9/18/2013 @ 3:28 pm

  249. http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/09/18/What-SWAT-Team-Told-to-Stand-Down-Rather-Than-Aid-Municipal-Cops-Trying-to-Stop-Aaron-Alexis-Rampage

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/18/2013 @ 3:29 pm

  250. Well, here are the victims, Emperor.

    http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2013/09/us/dc-navy-yard-victims/index.html?iid=article_sidebar

    Comment by elissa (bf3931) — 9/18/2013 @ 3:33 pm

  251. Comment by elissa (bf3931) — 9/18/2013 @ 3:33 pm

    Damn. Brings tears.

    Comment by The Emperor (92db31) — 9/18/2013 @ 3:40 pm

  252. Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/18/2013 @ 3:29 pm

    Benghazi?

    Comment by The Emperor (4efdcc) — 9/18/2013 @ 3:51 pm

  253. Standing down is a trend.

    Comment by JD (5c1832) — 9/18/2013 @ 4:26 pm

  254. Standing down is a trend.

    In the Obama administration, so is courage, honor and duty.

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/18/2013 @ 4:34 pm

  255. …same trend

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/18/2013 @ 4:34 pm

  256. Are there any good trends developing, Pons? Right now it is just Teh Suck, as far as I can tell.

    Comment by JD (5c1832) — 9/18/2013 @ 4:45 pm

  257. R.I.P. boxer Ken Norton

    Comment by Icy (a5a5cd) — 9/18/2013 @ 5:10 pm

  258. Well, uh, no…geez, there’s gotta be something…

    …he is getting more criticism (sort of). His former SecDef called him a pu$$y (I’m paraphrasing.)

    Comment by Pons Asinorum (8ce71a) — 9/18/2013 @ 5:11 pm

  259. “The IG report specifically found that 52 felons had received unauthorized access to military facilities for 62 to 1,035 days.”

    narciso – It would be racist to discriminate against convicted felons who had paid their debts to society by depriving them of jobs in Obama’s America merely on account of prior criminal behavior.

    That IG should denounce him/herself.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/18/2013 @ 5:35 pm

  260. “Pre-Employment Inquiries and Arrest & Conviction

    There is no Federal law that clearly prohibits an employer from asking about arrest and conviction records. However, using such records as an absolute measure to prevent an individual from being hired could limit the employment opportunities of some protected groups and thus cannot be used in this way.

    Since an arrest alone does not necessarily mean that an applicant has committed a crime the employer should not assume that the applicant committed the offense. Instead, the employer should allow him or her the opportunity to explain the circumstances of the arrest(s) and should make a reasonable effort to determine whether the explanation is reliable.

    Even if the employer believes that the applicant did engage in the conduct for which he or she was arrested that information should prevent him or her from employment only to the extent that it is evident that the applicant cannot be trusted to perform the duties of the position when

    considering the nature of the job,
    the nature and seriousness of the offense,
    and the length of time since it occurred.

    This is also true for a conviction.

    Several state laws limit the use of arrest and conviction records by prospective employers. These range from laws and rules prohibiting the employer from asking the applicant any questions about arrest records to those restricting the employer’s use of conviction data in making an employment decision.”

    http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices/inquiries_arrest_conviction.cfm

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/18/2013 @ 7:59 pm

  261. I read the following and get a much better sense of what made the killer tick. But not in terms of whatever mental illness he might be diagnosed with, but in terms of his political slant. It sounds like he was infected with a good dose of leftist-itis, in particular a strain known as Al-Sharpton-itis.

    usnews.nbcnews.com:

    [Aaron Alexis] felt like he had been cheated out of money from the contract and complained that he was mistreated because he was black, Kristi Suthamtewkal said.

    “He felt a lot of discrimination and and racism with white people especially,” she said.

    There was also a growing sense of entitlement and disrespect, she said. “He did have the tendency to feel like people owed him something all the time.”

    He got annoyed when she couldn’t give him rides, and he started eating the couple’s food without permission, and ignoring her when she complained, she said.

    Comment by Mark (58ea35) — 9/18/2013 @ 8:04 pm

  262. Daleyrocks, EEOC has no authority in Federal caselaw or statute for their assertions. Note how vaguely that crap is written.

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 9/18/2013 @ 8:32 pm

  263. “Daleyrocks, EEOC has no authority in Federal caselaw or statute for their assertions.”

    SPQR – They admit that right up front. They like to frighten gullible people though and it can be a big headache to tangle with them.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/18/2013 @ 9:19 pm

  264. daleyrocks, which is why this crap of theirs pisses me off.

    Comment by SPQR (768505) — 9/18/2013 @ 9:24 pm

  265. SPQR – It’s all about teh disparate impact!

    I’ve had bureaucrats from the IRS and DOL threaten to throw me in jail at work in the past and come out on top each time. I’ve been involved with EEOC disputes, but nothing that rose to a similar level.

    Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 9/18/2013 @ 9:47 pm

  266. R.I.P. Ken Norton

    http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/boxing/hall-famer-ken-norton-heavyweight-champion-once-broke-011452730–box.html

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/18/2013 @ 9:52 pm

  267. http://www.usmc-mccs.org/sports/hof/2004-norton.cfm

    Comment by Steve57 (6f26ff) — 9/18/2013 @ 10:07 pm

  268. Why was the tactical squad told to stand down?
    I wonder if it was because the killer was under orders by obama.

    Comment by mg (31009b) — 9/19/2013 @ 2:47 am

  269. daley

    calling bs on that one – IRS and DOL employees at your level don’t make any threats and have no power of arrest.

    geez…

    you guy have got to stop reading the tea party leaves

    All govt forms carry threats including filling out a passport application, extrapolating that into an indictment and threats of arrest is silly

    Comment by EPWJ (6140f6) — 9/19/2013 @ 4:11 am

  270. Oh for the sake of f@ck

    Comment by JD (5c1832) — 9/19/2013 @ 4:57 am

  271. Time for the Billy Madison, JD;

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/19/2013 @ 5:28 am

  272. Law enforcement officials told NBC News that Alexis created a webpage with the name “Mohammed Salem,” but they said he never did anything with it. They said they had found nothing else that might indicate any interest in violent jihad or even in Islam.

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/19/2013 @ 6:20 am

  273. Remember, Holder and Obama don’t want blacks excluded from jobs for merely being felons and whackjobs- that’s anti-black discrimination!

    Comment by Smarty (28e0f8) — 9/19/2013 @ 3:43 pm

  274. elissa @94. I would have disavowed this title – I don’t want to mislead people, except for people like Brett Kimberlin and company, whom I would like to think I have oodles of cash and access to a good law firm.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:06 am

  275. 268. Comment by mg (31009b) — 9/19/2013 @ 2:47 am

    Why was the tactical squad told to stand down?

    I had thought from other news reports quoting some police official about how they don’t wait and they respond right away with whoever is there, that this kind of thing – like what happened at Columbine – was no longer happening, but it seems like it did with the most trained group of police. They’re behind the times there.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:12 am

  276. Some police responded within 2 minutes but they had the wrong address (wrong building)

    Within 7 minutes some polie were there, and they went to him, and they chased him and he ran away and they lost hiom for about 15 minutes, during which he scrawled two messages. He was then spotted when he put his head outside a pole or pillar where he was hiding and then shot to death.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:14 am

  277. Actually no;

    http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2013/09/22/capitol-hill-swat-team-still-waiting-for-answers-on-why-they-were-stood-down-during-navy-yard-shooting/

    Comment by narciso (3fec35) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:16 am

  278. I heard this on the CBS Evening News on Wednesday. It seems like although Aaron Alexis did not leave a suicide note, he did leave something at the end.

    http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-09-18/local/42167335_1_enforcement-police-rhode-island

    Aaron Alexis carved bizarre phrases on the stock of his shotgun before he killed 12 people at the Washington Navy Yard on Monday, and investigators are hoping the words provide clues to what prompted the shooting, two law enforcement officials said.

    The phrases were “Better off this way” and “My ELF weapon,” according to the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing.

    The meaning of this is obvious:

    Aaron Alexis either thought he was going to die, or that the voices or noises in his head, or pain, or vibrations, or whatever else had been going on in his head for the past month and half was not going to end.

    They probably also had the effect of slightly reducing his intellectual capacity.

    He knew the voices weren’t real, but he thoughjt he was being targeted by the Navy in some sort of LSD or other experiment maybe.

    When this was added to his extremely bad character, the result was this murder-suicide.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:22 am

  279. The SWAT team may not have been told why they were told to stand down, but this is pretty obvious – force protection. And/or somebody decided they needed to be saved for a possible more serious attack or a more vital target.

    Comment by Sammy Finkelman (67f658) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:26 am

  280. Oh, Sammy. Sometimes what seems clear isn’t. I know it’s fun to speculate, especially here among friends, but try to gather facts first before you jump to conclusions.

    Comment by DRJ (a83b8b) — 9/22/2013 @ 11:32 am

  281. In other words Sammy, SHUT UP!

    Comment by Yoda (c1890a) — 9/22/2013 @ 2:25 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6196 secs.