• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

FFS - Gunman at large after two shot at Central Michigan University

Update indicates this is likely a "domestic" situation, which brings up another aspect of needed gun reform - the so called "boyfriend loophole"
 
So is this at a University located in central Michigan or Central Michigan University?

That is all I have... shootings just don't seem to matter anymore... you know Obama and Chicago and all. But hopefully this is just one of those normal handgun murders and not a semi-automatic massacre, because we have been reduced to hoping for such things, i.e. "tamer" death tolls when people get homicidal.

Let's see, what other fodder do we have?
article said:
Authorities said they're searching for a person of interest identified as James Eric Davis Jr. He is described as a black male, 19 years-old, 5-foot-10-inches tall and weighing 135 pounds.
Okay Internet, go searching for pictures and photos and addresses and post all that shit online, regardless if it is this specific person or not. I'll start.
113102.jpg

- - - Updated - - -

Update indicates this is likely a "domestic" situation, which brings up another aspect of needed gun reform - the so called "boyfriend loophole"
Oh fuck! You just triggered someone.
 
Update indicates this is likely a "domestic" situation, which brings up another aspect of needed gun reform - the so called "boyfriend loophole"
Oh fuck! You just triggered someone.

:hysterical: I swear I thought the same thing as I was typing "boyfriend loophole" :p

Let's make it very very very clear right now... some states do have existing gun restrictions for spouses (male or female) who have a documented (police) history of domestic violence, but this does not apply to boyfriends/girlfriends with the same history. One of the many items on the table for gun reform is to close this loophole.
 
Detroit News reports 2 killed. National news reporting only that 2 have been shot/injurded. Very little detail at this point.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...2/cmu-police-search-shooter-campus/388378002/

Update indicates this is likely a "domestic" situation, which brings up another aspect of needed gun reform - the so called "boyfriend loophole"

Only two dead and suspect at large is a strong indication that the root cause is personal, not a mass shooting.

And the answer to the boyfriend problem is that you get out of the relationship at the first indication of domestic violence issues. Domestic abuse will happen with or without guns.
 
Detroit News reports 2 killed. National news reporting only that 2 have been shot/injurded. Very little detail at this point.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...2/cmu-police-search-shooter-campus/388378002/

Update indicates this is likely a "domestic" situation, which brings up another aspect of needed gun reform - the so called "boyfriend loophole"

Only two dead and suspect at large is a strong indication that the root cause is personal, not a mass shooting.
I would have assumed that the two dead would be the only required metric for not calling this a "mass shooting", suspect at large or not.

And the answer to the boyfriend problem is that you get out of the relationship at the first indication of domestic violence issues. Domestic abuse will happen with or without guns.
Good ole LP.
 
:hysterical: I swear I thought the same thing as I was typing "boyfriend loophole" :p
More like "adult child loophole" in this case.

Let's make it very very very clear right now... some states do have existing gun restrictions for spouses (male or female) who have a documented (police) history of domestic violence, but this does not apply to boyfriends/girlfriends with the same history.
Why should violence against a spouse even have a different threshold for banning gun ownership anyway? People are banned for felonies, but why is it lowered to misdemeanors when the victim is a spouse? Especially since spouses can lie in during domestic arguments and quarrels.

One of the many items on the table for gun reform is to close this loophole.

How would you even legally define what is a "boyfriend" or "girlfriend" vs. "causally dating", "talking", "Netflix and chill" or the ever popular "it's complicated"? Would courts go by "Facebook official"?
 
Detroit News reports 2 killed. National news reporting only that 2 have been shot/injurded. Very little detail at this point.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...2/cmu-police-search-shooter-campus/388378002/

Update indicates this is likely a "domestic" situation, which brings up another aspect of needed gun reform - the so called "boyfriend loophole"

Only two dead and suspect at large is a strong indication that the root cause is personal, not a mass shooting.

And the answer to the boyfriend problem is that you get out of the relationship at the first indication of domestic violence issues. Domestic abuse will happen with or without guns.

There is a toxic question that surrounds abused women: “why didn’t she just leave him?”

The answer, too often, is that many women that do leave get killed.

“The thing that I did not know that was so revealing to me was that anywhere between 50% and 75% of domestic violence homicides happen at the point of separation or after [the victim] has already left [her abuser],” says Cynthia Hill, director of HBO’s Private Violence.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/u...private-violence-women-men-abuse-hbo-ray-rice

And yes, it works the other way, too...

 Elisabeth Anne "Betty" Broderick (born November 7, 1947) is an American former suburban housewife convicted of the November 5, 1989 murders[1] of her ex-husband, Daniel T. Broderick III, and his second wife, Linda (Kolkena) Broderick. At a second trial on December 11, 1991, she was convicted of two counts of second-degree murder and later sentenced to 32-years-to-life in prison. The case received extensive media attention and was extremely controversial.
 
Looks like Derec is correct about "parent-child"

An Illinois police officer and his wife were shot dead at Central Michigan University in Mount Pleasant this morning, according to an Illinois politician. The suspected shooter is still at large, according to the university, who added that "police believe the situation started from a domestic situation."

https://www.google.com/search?q=mic.....69i57j0l5.4179j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Police in the US state of Michigan are hunting a student who shot and killed his parents when they came to pick him up for spring break, US media report. James Eric Davis Jr reportedly gunned down his mother and father in his dormitory a day after he went to hospital for a drug-related issue.
https://www.google.com/search?q=mic.....69i57j0l5.4179j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Haven't seen any reports about what kind of gun.
 
This hits home for me. I was a Chippewa. Class of '87. CMU is a campus where nothing really bad happens.
 
Why should violence against a spouse even have a different threshold for banning gun ownership anyway? People are banned for felonies, but why is it lowered to misdemeanors when the victim is a spouse? Especially since spouses can lie in during domestic arguments and quarrels.

It is astonishing after all the many times I have watched people prove to you that just-left boyfriends are the most predictable criminals on the planet that you still remain ignorant of the fact. It is a marvel to behold. Again and again and again.
 
Detroit News reports 2 killed. National news reporting only that 2 have been shot/injurded. Very little detail at this point.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...2/cmu-police-search-shooter-campus/388378002/

Update indicates this is likely a "domestic" situation, which brings up another aspect of needed gun reform - the so called "boyfriend loophole"

Only two dead and suspect at large is a strong indication that the root cause is personal, not a mass shooting.

And the answer to the boyfriend problem is that you get out of the relationship at the first indication of domestic violence issues. Domestic abuse will happen with or without guns.

Ohh it´s so simple girls! Loren says "get out of the relationship at the first indication of domestic violence issues". Why had we not thought of that yet?
 
And the answer to the boyfriend problem is that you get out of the relationship at the first indication of domestic violence issues. Domestic abuse will happen with or without guns.
Good ole LP.
Jimmy, you don't understand. If you don't get out at the first sign of domestic violence, any subsequent attacks you suffer is YOUR FAULT. Which means there is no reason to interfere with the NRA fellators rights.
 
It is astonishing after all the many times I have watched people prove to you that just-left boyfriends are the most predictable criminals on the planet that you still remain ignorant of the fact. It is a marvel to behold. Again and again and again.
Violent crime is violent crime. I do not think the threshold for getting disqualified for gun ownership should depend on things like relationship to the victim.

Note that even without the special DV provision violent felons are banned from gun ownership regardless. So serious violence is covered anyway. It is only the bullshit misdemeanor charges where it matters at all.
 
So it looks like student killed his parents after he had been hospitalized for erratic behavior.

I guess that qualifies as evidence supporting that a person is more likely to die from a gun if they have one.
 
Four ways an individual can lose their right to own a gun:

1. Transporting weapons across state lines in violation of that state's gun laws
2. Drug use (but alcohol use is fine).
3. Dishonorable discharge from the military
4. Felony conviction - even for non-violent felonies (like 3-strike drug laws)

Statistics on domestic violence

1 in 3 women and 1 in 4 men have been victims of [some form of] physical violence by an intimate partner within their lifetime.

1 in 4 women and 1 in 7 men have been victims of severe physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime.

1 in 7 women and 1 in 18 men have been stalked by an intimate partner during their lifetime to the point in which they felt very fearful or believed that they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed.

1 in 15 children are exposed to intimate partner violence each year, and 90% of these children are eyewitnesses to this violence

With all of that domestic violence going on, how many cases result in felony convictions?

The majority of domestic violence cases, regardless of the seriousness of the assault, are charged as or pleaded down to misdemeanors. It can be difficult to find hard statistics on this, but there are some:

The 2010 Domestic Violence Court Watch Report, put together by nonprofit Independent Advocates, states that, of the 1,916 misdemeanor domestic violence cases in Toledo Municipal Court last year, only 13 percent resulted in convictions; 82 percent were dismissed or amended to lesser charges, according to the report. Five percent of cases were pending.

From a sample of 517 cases of domestic violence:

>> Only 1 in 4 case are reported to the police
>> Of the 130 incidents that are reported, the police did not even show up to investigate 27 of them
>> In the 103 cases police responded, only 3 in 5 cases resulted in an arrest (even in states with mandatory arrest requirements!)
>> Of the 61 who are arrested, 1 of 3 are never charged/prosecuted
>> Less than half of those charged/prosecuted are convicted
>> And even if convicted, less than half of those spend even a single day in jail

"Of those cases that are prosecuted, many are charged or plead down to misdemeanors even though the conduct constituted a felony. When prosecutors do go forward, the final disposition is most often a period of probation. A growing number of defendants must also complete a batterer's treatment program as a condition of probation. Only a small percentage of domestic violence offenders are sentenced to incarceration" (Hanna, 1998).

What does this all mean?

It means that this:

Violent crime is violent crime.
is not accurate. It means that this:

So serious violence is covered anyway. It is only the bullshit misdemeanor charges where it matters at all.
is not accurate.

It means that the federal Lautenberg Amendment was necessary, especially because:

The presence of a gun in a domestic violence situation increases the risk of homicide by 500%

And if that is not enough for you:

A study of intimate partner homicides found that 20% of victims were not the intimate partners themselves, but family members, friends, neighbors, persons who intervened, law enforcement responders, or bystanders.

And of course, we still have this kind of attitude in law enforcement and elsewhere:

When asked how Carroll County could improve its handling of domestic violence cases, [Sheriff of Carroll County Arkansas] Grudek said he was unconvinced that a more proactive response — like setting high bail for serial abusers, or requiring GPS tracking for offenders who violate restraining orders — would make a substantial difference.

“The question you’re asking me is what’s wrong with the courts,” he said. “I’m asking you, what’s wrong with the women?”
 
Why should violence against a spouse even have a different threshold for banning gun ownership anyway? People are banned for felonies, but why is it lowered to misdemeanors when the victim is a spouse? Especially since spouses can lie in during domestic arguments and quarrels.

Because experience has shown that it's such a predictor of future violence.
 
Only two dead and suspect at large is a strong indication that the root cause is personal, not a mass shooting.

And the answer to the boyfriend problem is that you get out of the relationship at the first indication of domestic violence issues. Domestic abuse will happen with or without guns.

There is a toxic question that surrounds abused women: “why didn’t she just leave him?”

The answer, too often, is that many women that do leave get killed.

“The thing that I did not know that was so revealing to me was that anywhere between 50% and 75% of domestic violence homicides happen at the point of separation or after [the victim] has already left [her abuser],” says Cynthia Hill, director of HBO’s Private Violence.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/u...private-violence-women-men-abuse-hbo-ray-rice

And yes, it works the other way, too...

 Elisabeth Anne "Betty" Broderick (born November 7, 1947) is an American former suburban housewife convicted of the November 5, 1989 murders[1] of her ex-husband, Daniel T. Broderick III, and his second wife, Linda (Kolkena) Broderick. At a second trial on December 11, 1991, she was convicted of two counts of second-degree murder and later sentenced to 32-years-to-life in prison. The case received extensive media attention and was extremely controversial.

You get out long before it reaches that point! It's not that you flee when you feel your life is in danger, you leave when you're hit.
 
Back
Top Bottom