Road Rage Shooting in PA - Young Woman Killed

[[DHT]Osiris]

The tragedy is if this guy had been given a mental stability test as part of his gun application it would have never been issued. People who have the propensity to pop off in stressful situations should not carry guns.

Out of curiosity, how would you go about testing such a thing? And how would you verify they won't 'pop off' in a stressful situation?

Please bear in mind, guns are sold at Walmart.

 

[Kwatt]

..., how would you go about testing such a thing?...

"The California Way" Pass a gun safety test law and slowly change the law till none can pass it. So far no new semi-auto handguns can be imported to Cal. I am sure other firearms will follow..

The mental test will consist of 1 question. Do you want to own a firearm? If the answer is YES. Then you are mentally unfit to own one.


.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Totally not a factor.

But the very first report on this story makes sure we know the victim is black and the perpetrator is white........

It's the south and a black person was shot by an entitled redneck in a pickup truck. I'd be stunned if race wasn't a factor. Giving him the benefit of the doubt maybe he didn't mean to kill her. He probably wanted to pump one into her car as a warning and his aim is for shit. But I bet if it was a white guy behind the wheel he wouldn't have fired at all. It takes a shitload of things to go wrong in the brain to shoot an unarmed person in the head out of issues with merging, but it's silly and naive to automatically dismiss race as a factor. In that part of the country, race is almost always a factor.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

It's the south and a black person was shot by an entitled redneck in a pickup truck. I'd be stunned if race wasn't a factor. Giving him the benefit of the doubt maybe he didn't mean to kill her. He probably wanted to pump one into her car as a warning and his aim is for shit. But I bet if it was a white guy behind the wheel he wouldn't have fired at all. It takes a shitload of things to go wrong in the brain to shoot an unarmed person in the head out of issues with merging, but it's silly and naive to automatically dismiss race as a factor. In that part of the country, race is almost always a factor.

Eh? This was in PA, wasn't it?

To be fair, the worst, most rage-inducing driving I ever had was working in Savannah, without a doubt. Never did DC/LA/NYC or whatever, but those Army fucks coming out of Savannah on 516 in the afternoon are out of control.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Eh? This was in PA, wasn't it?

My bad, yeah. I was reading another WTF story and it was Florida and got it in my head that this one was Florida too. Seems like about 90% of them are Florida, so I've had a little Pavlovian conditioning on stories like that.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

My bad, yeah. I was reading another WTF story and it was Florida and got it in my head that this one was Florida too. Seems like about 90% of them are Florida, so I've had a little Pavlovian conditioning on stories like that.

Haha I hear you, almost every time something F'd up happens, it's Florida Man.

 

[SlowSpyder]

This guy used his 2A rights wrongly, and it cost someone's live, sadly. He should face the full consequences of the law. But why does it always become about banning or restricting guns when this kind of thing happens?

In other news someone used their 21st Amendment rights wrongly and caused a drunk driving accident. No one wants to ban alcohol even though it puts far more bodies in the ground.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

This guy used his 2A rights wrongly, and it cost someone's live, sadly. He should face the full consequences of the law. But why does it always become about banning or restricting guns when this kind of thing happens?

In other news someone used their 21st Amendment rights wrongly and caused a drunk driving accident. No one wants to ban alcohol even though it puts far more bodies in the ground.

People tend to think in the most simplistic terms imaginable. If person who OWNED_GUN=0 sees action perpetrated by someone who's OWNED_GUN value is different, using that object, they presume it's caused by that object, and by simply setting everyone's values to 0, said terrible action won't happen anymore.

Of course, this doesn't extend to say, not letting odd number'd VINs drive at specific timeframes, or banning vehicles, or mandatory psych evals, or any of a number of other $variables which were also present/editable at the time of this occurrence.

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

Let me tell you, PA is like MO except you can freeze to death in winter. Especially in Erie. That human-trafficking survivor friend of mine exists there--I won't call what she's suffering "living." Apparently her neighbors have 3 sons, and they're all named Matt. What the shit.

 

[HomerJS]

Out of curiosity, how would you go about testing such a thing? And how would you verify they won't 'pop off' in a stressful situation?

Please bear in mind, guns are sold at Walmart.

That would be for professionals to administer. There are all kinds of occupations that do psychological screenings. A test can be designed to detect propensity for violence.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

That would be for professionals to administer. There are all kinds of occupations that do psychological screenings. A test can be designed to detect propensity for violence.

Okay, so is that organization now liable if one 'slips through'?
Who pays for it?
How is this handled with private gun sales?
Who's got the list of approved professionals?
Who audits those professionals?
How often do owners get re-checked? Psychological screening, as well as human minds, change over time.

I can come up with a few more questions, if you'd like.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

That would be for professionals to administer. There are all kinds of occupations that do psychological screenings. A test can be designed to detect propensity for violence.

None of the screenings is even close to being accurate or safe. Police undergo batteries of psychological tests and situational reaction response measurements to detect propensity for violence before they get guns or badges. And we see as much of this shit or even more from them as we do from any other segment of the population. Unless they've left behind notebooks filled with unabomber level rants anyone can fool a test if they know it's a test.

"Okay gun candidates, today we're going to test your propensity to shoot people in the head if they merge badly, please act as you normally would" NOBODY is going to pull out a gun and pretend shoot a test subject. You don't know how anyone will really react until it's not a test.

 

[blackangst1]

I don't understand. What camp? It's a logical fallacy, not a point of contention.

Oh, you tried to defend it by being literal. It is an illegitimate argument because of the failure of logic and that's the end of it. You can't argue that no responsible gun owner could ever be an irresponsible gun owner because they are, likely, at one point the same person (or at least transitioned from the former to the latter). This means that many irresponsible gun owners were, at a time, responsible gun owners. I'll give you the out of saying that sure, there are people who have obtained guns illegally, and that would make them irresponsible from the start. Not the case with this guy.

I'm not making that case at all. The only thing I'm saying is he was a legal gun owner who made an irresponsible decision. That's it.

 

[blackangst1]

He was certainly irresponsible, but given the right circumstances even the most responsible gun owners can snap/have a mental lapse and do something very irresponsible. As was said before humans are flawed creatures, even the best of them.

I'm not advocating for legislation mind you, I'm on the fence on that one. I do recognize a problem though.

And I agree 100% with this.

 

[blackangst1]

This guy used his 2A rights wrongly, and it cost someone's live, sadly. He should face the full consequences of the law. But why does it always become about banning or restricting guns when this kind of thing happens?

In other news someone used their 21st Amendment rights wrongly and caused a drunk driving accident. No one wants to ban alcohol even though it puts far more bodies in the ground.

+1

 

[blackangst1]

That would be for professionals to administer. There are all kinds of occupations that do psychological screenings. A test can be designed to detect propensity for violence.

Out of curiosity are there any other freedoms granted by the constitution that you feel need psychiatric evaluation before allowing?

 

[Stokely]

it's amazing how many rage-filled aholes there are on the road. I worked with one, and rode with him to lunch....once. He's literally pounding the steering wheel on a busy 4-lane road in the middle of town (tons of lights) because he can't get around someone fast enough....he finally does and he's a whopping 20 feet further along in stop and go traffic, flipping off the person he just went around. Dude no longer works there, he rage-quit with no notice (shocking).

Some huge percentage of the rageaholics drive big pickups. A smaller but still large percentage seem to be in BMW sports sedans. They tailgate me, I slow down a bit and wave in a friendly manner.

it's incredible how mad people get because they want to save, what: 30 seconds off their trip of a couple miles? That is the definition of dumbass in my book.