The aggravated assault conviction:
This sounds like yet another case where he kept finding cracks and slipping through them.
I was using domestic violence charges as an example of a similar thing. Not quite sure but legally isn’t a conviction of domestic violence supposed to keep you from possessing a firearm? But it’s not like the police go around collecting guns from such people.
Sorry. My brain thought Illinois my fingers said Ohio for some reason.
The so called Lautenberg Amendment goes beyond the already existing federal law that banned felons from owning guns. Under Lautenberg you are prohibited from owning a gun if convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence assault. It also prohibits guns from being owned by those with a domestic violence restraining order.
The most disappointing thing about this case is that there is no follow up to make the offender surrender his firearm when it was discovered that he shouldn’t possess one. More effort and resources should be dedicated to that.
Coincidentally an employee of mine is being terminated tomorrow after returning from a long leave. They were told they would be contacted by HR. Probably a better course of action than having them return to a facility.
I was surprised that they had him come in to be fired. My employer would fire you basically on the spot, remove you from the building, and you could not get back in the building unless it was resolved thru the union. I read that the union rep was killed also. I also read that he had been laid off for the prior 2 weeks? Guys, get it over with, dragging it out doesn’t help anyone.
I’m wondering if some kind of investigation was going on, most likely theft.
I just think they had zero security there. They had no procedure to fire someone. Or they didn’t follow it. He was layed off for the previous 2 weeks, probably a DLO. Discplanry lay off. A union was involved, and the guy came in there hoping to be called back. He lost it, shot up the place. They could have sent him a certified letter? Maybe not, don’t know their contract. There are steps in these contracts, and the guy knew where he stood. They should have fired him, rather than doing the layoff. I’ve been on both sides of this scene, drawing it out would suck. It sounds to me that he was hoping for some mercy, probably from the plant manager. Unless he witnessed whatever he was being fired for, why was he there? Generally, it is a personnel guy, and the union rep. Nobody wants spectators to their humiliation. My experience is that personnel folks really don’t make these decisions, they just have to follow orders. Really, a terrible day for everyone.
I wonder why such workplace shootings get such media coverage. There are incidents where as many and more people are killed with guns every week. See the ever continuing mass-killing thread. Is it because it happened in a public place instead of someone’s home or car? All these shootings are terrible-I just wonder why the workplace shootings get such press.
It’s the idea that a relatively normal situation - the termination of an employee - can result in 5 deaths, and scores of other lives ruined because of it.
What needs to be understood is that while we want to think of the gunman as a homicidal maniac - and you won’t get any disagreement from me that he is - it’s important to remember that a lot of mass shooters are suicidal. Murdering 5 or 10 people and then waiting to shoot it out with police is a suicidal act. People hellbent on getting themselves killed aren’t going to be deterred by laws. I absolutely agree that more needs to be done to prevent suicidal people from possessing guns, but these people also need medical intervention, as well as a medical system and a society that encourages them to become better human beings.
Going to work to shoot your boss, and any others involved in your firing doesn’t qualify as a mass shooting.
But he shot more than his boss; he shot perceived tormentors, some of whom had nothing to do with his employment situation. He wasn’t merely homicidal; he was homicidal and suicidal - aggrieved and enraged to the point of suicide.
I’m a strong proponent of firearms reforms, but I’ll agree with the gun lobby in saying that it won’t mean anything if we don’t address other fundamental flaws in our society, which also raises one of the key complaints I have with the gun lobby: most of them are in no way interested in addressing or solving those issues - more funding for mental health; improving education; a less racist, less sexist society; a less violent culture that eschews using violence and harsh punishments as discipline; and an economically fairer society.
Conservatives seem to want nothing to do with those other cultural problems that they use as deflections and smokescreens to defend their gun collections, which makes it more likely that, over time, there will one day be a legislative ‘correction’ that will be fully endorsed by a generation of people who don’t go to bed with their guns as though they were their teddy bears.
All praise to Saint Reagan for eviscerating what little mental health care programs and services we had back in the day.
Guns for everyone, y’all.
It’s a nightmare. So what are your thoughts on how to prevent this kind of tragedy?