View Full Version : Shooting in Florida
Just happened at Jacksonville Landing where a Madden NFL video game tournament was being held. No word on how many are injured. WTF is up with Florida these days?
https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/26/mass-shooting-reported-at-jacksonville-landing-police-say.amp.html
Four killed is the number I saw, but it's very recent so who knows what's going on.
gnihcraes
08-26-2018, 13:01
My son is there for the tournament. His first trip alone without family as a 20 year old.
He was out of the tournament yesterday, but was walking back to the event to watch some more of it this morning - just a few minutes away when the shooting happened.
He's called us several times, he's ok, but shaken up just thinking that he was minutes away from going back in there.
ugh.
OtterbatHellcat
08-26-2018, 13:07
Glad to hear he's okay, gnihcraes.
Know that area very well.
The Landing is between the good parts of JAX (Southside) and the Northside. If you boat, you can pull up and dock from the St. Johns. Used to be a couple of nice restaurants there but I don't know now.
Street violence/crime happens all the time in the Northside and barely gets a mention. When it drifts down, it gets noticed. Their downtown is very similar to Denver ca 1990s.
This is definitely different.
thedave1164
08-26-2018, 13:49
My son is there for the tournament. His first trip alone without family as a 20 year old.
He was out of the tournament yesterday, but was walking back to the event to watch some more of it this morning - just a few minutes away when the shooting happened.
He's called us several times, he's ok, but shaken up just thinking that he was minutes away from going back in there.
ugh.
Glad he is ok
gnihcraes
08-26-2018, 14:40
Thanks.
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
DenverGP
08-26-2018, 14:48
Shooter was a competitor in the tournament who lost and came back with a gun.
UrbanWolf
08-26-2018, 15:23
Wow, talking about being a sour loser.
In before people start blaming this on video game culture or making lame jokes about how maybe we should ban video games.
In before people start blaming this on video game culture or making lame jokes about how maybe we should ban video games.
Right. The Madden NFL game is rated for 7yrs and older. Also not a Shooter game like Call of Duty which had been blamed for causing people to commit murder. The shooter lost in the qualifying rounds and couldn’t handle losing. No trophy=Kill
Zundfolge
08-26-2018, 15:38
Venue was yet another Gun Free Zone ... imagine that.
If only those pixels hadn't kneeled!
Right. The Madden NFL game is rated for 7yrs and older. Also not a Shooter game like Call of Duty which had been blamed for causing people to commit murder. The shooter lost in the qualifying rounds and couldn’t handle losing. No trophy=Kill
People who don't understand video games do not make a distinction between types of video games.
I guess it was the first time in his life he learned that not "everyone is a winner".
BushMasterBoy
08-26-2018, 20:56
News said the shooter won the Madden tourney two years ago.
Fentonite
08-26-2018, 21:39
Kelly - I’m very glad your boy is ok and wasn’t a direct witness. I know you’re gonna hug the heck out of him when he gets home!
Just heard on the news. Casualties changed to 2 dead, 11 wounded.
gnihcraes
08-26-2018, 22:01
Kelly - I’m very glad your boy is ok and wasn’t a direct witness. I know you’re gonna hug the heck out of him when he gets home!Thanks, I will. He seems pretty upset with all this and wasn't directly involved. We'll see how he is when he makes it home tomorrow.
Sent from my SM-T813 using Tapatalk
Glad your boy is ok Kelly.
Glad your boy is ok Kelly.
Me too.
hollohas
08-27-2018, 07:50
I guess it was the first time in his life he learned that not "everyone is a winner".My thoughts exactly. When everyone is a winner, no one learns how to handle the disappointment of losing. I think this is one of the major contributors to this sort of violence.
Typical blame game on socials this morning. NRA's fault. GOP's fault. Trump's fault.
But, again, the little monster wasn't a member/supporter of any of those!
Jacksonville Shooter Was Member of Anti-Trump ‘Resistance’ – Referred to Trump Supporters at “Trumptards” – Murdered 4 People
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/08/jacksonville-shooter-was-member-of-anti-trump-resistance-referred-to-trump-supporters-at-trumptards-murdered-4-people/
Actually murdered 2, wounded 9 with gunfire, 2 got hurt fleeing the scene, and offed himself. If he just would have reversed that order, this wouldn't have impacted so many lives.
Sweet Jesus Kelly. SO very glad to hear your son is okay. I will be sure to stop by when he gets home. Crazy times we live in. Stay safe.
No way!!!
APNewsBreak: Shooting suspect had history of mental illness (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/apnewsbreak-shooting-suspect-had-history-of-mental-illness/ar-BBMwyVK)
BALTIMORE — The suspect in a deadly shooting at a Florida video game tournament had previously been hospitalized for mental illness, according to court records in his home state of Maryland reviewed by The Associated Press.
Divorce filings from the parents of 24-year-old David Katz of Baltimore say that as an adolescent he was twice hospitalized in psychiatric facilities and that he was prescribed antipsychotic and antidepressant medications.
The records show Katz's parents disagreed on how to care for their troubled son, with his father claiming his estranged wife was exaggerating symptoms of mental illness as part of their long and bitter custody battle. The couple divorced in 2007.
Divorce filings say David Katz played video games obsessively as a young adolescent, often refusing to go to school or to bathe. Elizabeth Katz, a toxicologist who worked at the Department of Agriculture, said she would confiscate some of her son's gaming equipment after finding him playing games in the wee hours.
"His hair would very often go unwashed for days. When I took his gaming equipment controllers away so he couldn't play at 3 or 4 in the morning, I'd get up and find that he was just walking around the house in circles," the mother said, according to a transcript included in the court files.
At one point, she put his put his gaming controllers in her bedroom behind a locked door and he punched a hole in the door, she said.
Elizabeth Katz said her youngest son had increasing difficulty concentrating following his parents' split. A judge awarded custody of the boy to his mother, with visitation rights to the father.
At times David "curled up into a ball," refused to attend school and sobbed, she said. She asserted that her ex-husband instructed David not to take Risperidal — an anti-psychotic medication prescribed to him. The father claimed in court filings that David was not "diagnosed as psychotic."
He missed large stretches of school while under his mother's supervision. He was admitted to the Sheppard Pratt mental health system in Ellicott City for about 12 days in late 2007. Court documents say a psychiatrist at that time administered antidepressants. He later spent about 13 days at Potomac Ridge, a mental health services facility in Rockville.
Richard Katz, a NASA engineer, asserted that his ex-wife had "an obsession with using mental health professionals and in particular psychiatric drugs to perform the work that parents should naturally do." He said she routinely gave false information to mental health care providers. He described one incident in which his son was handcuffed by police after locking himself in his mother's car in an attempt to avoid going to a mental health appointment with her.
...but the guns are the problem.
In other news, the guns used in the attack were purchased legally in Maryland. The family of one of the victims is blaming "senseless gun violence".
eddiememphis
08-27-2018, 17:37
If he had a history of being treated for mental illness, he obviously lied on the ATF form.
So an honest question is how to keep guns out the hands of nuts with criminal intent without impeding our Constitutional rights?
I don't want to undergo any kind of medical or psychiatric evaluation before buying my next gun. * It's too subjective and the less government the better. But this kid clearly had problems and should not have had access to a firearm, but I can't think of any way to keep them from him.
*(Which will likely be next month, I've been drooling on a Springfield EMP 9mm for months.)
eddiememphis
08-27-2018, 17:39
Also, watch out. They are coming for laser sights next. Everything I have read has mentioned them and it's on the news as I type this.
When laser sights are outlawed, only outlaws will have laser sights.
Maybe they should ban batteries next.
hurley842002
08-27-2018, 18:40
There is absolutely NO way to keep bad people-crazy people from having guns, drugs, sex, crossing open borders, blowing people up, cussing, etc, etc. Anyone who thinks they can stop someone from obtaining a gun is living in la la land.Pretty much...
If he had a history of being treated for mental illness, he obviously lied on the ATF form.
So an honest question is how to keep guns out the hands of nuts with criminal intent without impeding our Constitutional rights?
I don't want to undergo any kind of medical or psychiatric evaluation before buying my next gun. * It's too subjective and the less government the better. But this kid clearly had problems and should not have had access to a firearm, but I can't think of any way to keep them from him.
*(Which will likely be next month, I've been drooling on a Springfield EMP 9mm for months.)
I believe the standard set on 4473 is "involuntary commitment" by a lawful authority which I've always thought to be a very fair standard. I wouldn't want to keep people from getting the help they need under threat of losing their rights (which could happen with any mental health history [e.g. PTSD, feeling "depressed" not to be confused with depression]). And if someone is dangerous enough to warrant confinement then they probably aren't safe with guns.
I also like the due process that was given by the lawful authority (court for civilians).
Where I think it's gone off the rails is the closing of state facilities, which are likely too costly in 2018 in their original form. Judges can't really use the tool of commitment when there is no where to send someone. So we get the red flag laws which infringe without qualification/due process while the person deemed dangerous is still out and about (makes zero sense). I think we'll see more of this unfortunately.
The first thing we can do is stop creating gun free zones. We can't control when a crazy person will strike or what weapon(s) they'll use. We can offer an equal/greater amount of violence to stop the threat, if we stop disarming folks!
The second thing is the death penalty and apply it for mass shootings in the hopes of creating an adequate disincentive for those with the reasoning capacity to evaluate consequences.
The third thing is to acknowledge there are legitimately crazy people who need to be warehoused as cheaply as possible as their families/friends can't care for them or keep society safe. I hate this as a Conservative but I don't see other solutions. James Holmes and Adam Lanza are/were great candidates for this treatment. Everyone around them knew they were dangerous!
All of that said, they weren't going to get a confinement in this case as the murderer was highly functioning and (AFAIK) didn't have a record of violent behavior.
A lot of this is also sensationalized/blown out of proportion to implement gun control. Keep in mind there are 325,000,000 people in the US now. 40 mass shooting deaths in 2018 as of June, WP says 7,075 gun deaths YTD...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/mass-shootings-in-america/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6d009f54ab72
.455_Hunter
08-27-2018, 21:00
Katz and Lanza appear to have had similar mental and physical characteristics.
gnihcraes
08-27-2018, 21:16
Son is home, doing well.
Knows several that were injured. (by their screen names etc) Met a couple of them for the first time in person at the tournament. (prior to shooting)
GilpinGuy
08-27-2018, 21:23
Glad to hear that. What a thing for him to go through.
In the interest of making money from other people’s tragedy I have decided to begin a new lottery game. It will be Winners from Losers. To win, a player must correctly guess these five things:
Location (city and state)
Method or tool used
Number of dead
Number of injured
Name of the first federal politician to call for stricter legislation due to the tragedy
Each player pays $1 for each entry. First correct entry wins 70% of the take. The rest of the money goes to administrative costs with any excess divided among the states where the game is legal. I predict big things for this game. I believe the nation is ready.
I believe Jonathan Swift would be proud.
Great-Kazoo
08-27-2018, 21:59
In the interest of making money from other people’s tragedy I have decided to begin a new lottery game. It will be Winners from Losers. To win, a player must correctly guess these five things:
Location (city and state)
Method or tool used
Number of dead
Number of injured
Name of the first federal politician to call for stricter legislation due to the tragedy
Each player pays $1 for each entry. First correct entry wins 70% of the take. The rest of the money goes to administrative costs with any excess divided among the states where the game is legal. I predict big things for this game. I believe the nation is ready.
I believe Jonathan Swift would be proud.
Will there be a rope dancing run off, in case of a tie?
Rucker61
08-28-2018, 08:42
I believe the standard set on 4473 is "involuntary commitment" by a lawful authority which I've always thought to be a very fair standard. I wouldn't want to keep people from getting the help they need under threat of losing their rights (which could happen with any mental health history [e.g. PTSD, feeling "depressed" not to be confused with depression]). And if someone is dangerous enough to warrant confinement then they probably aren't safe with guns.
The wording of 18 USC 922g is "who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution". Whether or not he lied on the Form 4473 he certainly should have had membership in the NICS naughty boy list.
The wording of 18 USC 922g is "who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution". Whether or not he lied on the Form 4473 he certainly should have had membership in the NICS naughty boy list.
"Adjudicated" Implying the lawful authority on 4473. Again, I think that is fair. But I don't know of any process to adjudicate someone mentally defective yet not commit them. I do know the courts can appoint POAs for people deemed incapable in certain respects but that is not a declaration of mental defect/illness.
The overreach of Obama trying to make prohibited persons out of folks with financial POAs (elderly) was illegal and immoral (IMHO), for example. Just because and elderly person can't manage their finances doesn't mean they should be disarmed if living alone and competent enough to use a firearm for defense. That was actually another head scratcher for me... If someone isn't competent they probably shouldn't be living alone (I've had elderly family in this situation so I know there are in fact people who shouldn't be on their own).
But maybe a broader POA/ward of the state should make a prohibited person? And if so, for life?
How should he have had membership in this case?
I've read about the 911 calls, interaction with LE, and arguing with his mom. Does that on its own rise to the level of mental defect?
ChickNorris
08-28-2018, 15:01
Appears a young man was shot in the street near an elementary school in Denver metro. Without details or context the news is already airing the comments of freaked out parents & passersby.
Gnihcraes in no way is the following meant to diminish or dismiss what you just experienced with your child.
Honestly, I'm less concerned with the one off crazy & troubled far more by the climate of fear & precedence given to it by the media over fact & reason.
Zundfolge
08-28-2018, 15:55
Thing is you can write all the laws to prevent "bad/dangerous people" from legally acquiring and/or possessing guns but that won't stop anyone.
The only government based solution to the problem is for government to get out of the way of the people being armed whenever and wherever they wish.
Yes, it's more guns that will make us safer. Not less (because the only "less guns" you get with the law is less guns in the hands of good people).
I don't think the amount of guns will have a significant effect on crime rates. It's a pretty argument, but I don't think it works in real life any more than more laws make people safe.
Great-Kazoo
08-28-2018, 16:45
I don't think the amount of guns will have a significant effect on crime rates. It's a pretty argument, but I don't think it works in real life any more than more laws make people safe.
Well I know less guns will reduce the number of crimes committed. They will however increase the crime rate for unarmed victims.
I don't think it would. Larger community = more crime. That metric alone will drive numbers so much that any other metric will be almost undetectable.
Zundfolge
08-28-2018, 17:30
I don't think the amount of guns will have a significant effect on crime rates.
Dr Lott would disagree ... and he makes the case quite well. (https://www.amazon.com/More-Guns-Less-Crime-Understanding/dp/1541404416)
I don't think it would. Larger community = more crime. That metric alone will drive numbers so much that any other metric will be almost undetectable.
Explains increase in volume but not rate. It might make mass shootings more likely (volume of people) in cities.
There are mass shootings level casualties every weekend in Chicago that get ignored.
Denver had 59 homicides last year and is on track for slightly more this year. Shocking in aggregate.
Homicide rate (100K) in 2016 for Denver was 8.22. Go into Westminster and it drops to 3.51. Why are you ~2.5x more likely to be murdered in Denver? Some cities aren't even in the data because they have zero homicides!
http://www.cpr.org/news/story/a-dive-into-colorado-crime-data-in-5-charts
Thing is you can write all the laws to prevent "bad/dangerous people" from legally acquiring and/or possessing guns but that won't stop anyone.
The only government based solution to the problem is for government to get out of the way of the people being armed whenever and wherever they wish.
Yes, it's more guns that will make us safer. Not less (because the only "less guns" you get with the law is less guns in the hands of good people).
Yeah, I'm struggling to understand how society could have identified this nutter and prevented him from getting a gun. You have more ridiculous cases like Holmes where he is screaming he's insane, making threats, and even his therapist knew it (contacted LE).
This one, I'm not sure. I'm worried any criteria other than we have now would infringe on the rights of people who aren't a problem and never will be.
Homicide rate (100K) in 2016 for Denver was 8.22. Go into Westminster and it drops to 3.51. Why are you ~2.5x more likely to be murdered in Denver? Some cities aren't even in the data because they have zero homicides!
http://www.cpr.org/news/story/a-dive-into-colorado-crime-data-in-5-charts
There are probably a handful of reasons, but I'd really struggle to believe that the level of gun ownership was a significant factor.
There are probably a handful of reasons, but I'd really struggle to believe that the level of gun ownership was a significant factor.
If gun ownership (respecting RKBA, values) is a part of culture, could that be a factor?
Of course it could be a factor. I'm suggesting that ownership alone is not a significant factor. There is more to the story than just owning a gun. There are people who buy a gun at some point in their life and it just sits in a drawer forever. Those people aren't preventing any crime just by having a gun somewhere in their house.
Gun ownership is, for the most part, a hobby. One has to be at a certain level of financial/economic stability, to engage in and maintain any level of hobby. People with enough economic freedom also have the time and interest in maintaining the quality of the community in which they live. Not everyone is going to be involved, but enough people to make a difference.
You could basically make the same argument for piano ownership. People who own pianos aren't out actively preventing crime, or frightening criminals with the threat of having their fingers smashed by the fallboard anymore than gun owners are out actively preventing crimes. Criminals already live a life of constant risk, and I doubt that the presence of guns adds much perceived risk. Certainly not compared to just having a more involved and aware community to begin with.
I'm sure there is enough of a discussion here to run an entire years long survey. Just because I don't buy that argument anymore, doesn't mean others can't. Believe what you want, I just think that saying, "get more guns and people will behave," is just as tired of a cop-out as "make drugs and prostitution legal and tax the hell out of 'em!"
On a side note, I'm not at all against the state putting mass shooters/murders to death immediately, but I also don't see the death penalty as much of a deterrent, especially among mass shooters who regularly kill themselves anyway.
EDIT: With your emphasis on the culture, I suspect that we're saying similar things. I also suspect that you'd, correctly, point out that the culture of piano ownership and gun ownership are different.
[snip]
EDIT: With your emphasis on the culture, I suspect that we're saying similar things. I also suspect that you'd, correctly, point out that the culture of piano ownership and gun ownership are different.
Yes, we probably are.
While I don't think firearms are magical talismans that ward off criminals and crime, I do think they are a tool that people who have objectively good values have or want to have. I think laws reflect that too... Castle Doctrine vs. expectation to retreat, for example. A society that controls/bans guns is effectively revoking a natural right to self defense. That makes it easy for criminals. And the easier it gets, the less of a check on their behavior we have.
So fewer guns = less opportunity to balance crime = more crime
Not because the guns are magical metal but because they are tools in the hands of decent people. Decent people can't practice their values witout tools anymore than a construction worker can build a house without his tools.
I also think it's more than a hobby for this reason and why it's a Constitutionally protected right.
The concept of owning guns is not just a hobby, but I stand by my statement that for the vast majority of gun owners, it's a hobby.
The concept of owning guns is not just a hobby, but I stand by my statement that for the vast majority of gun owners, it's a hobby.
Understood.
I hope everyone sees it as a right first, fun second.
I would classify shooting sports, plinking, and hunting a "hobby". That's not what the authors and ratifiers of the Constitution had in mind.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.