FedEx shooter: A family member had reached out to authorities warning about the suspect's potential

[soothsayer]

Link to tweet

?s=21


Jim Sciutto
@jimsciutto
New: Suspect in the Indianapolis mass shooting which killed 8 was known to federal and local authorities prior to the attack. A family member had reached out to authorities warning about the suspect’s potential for violence. @evanperez @ShimonPro reporting
12:56 PM · Apr 16, 2021

[WarGamer]

1. AGAIN.

Opportunities for law enforcement to PREVENT a shooting.

Fail.

Have they released name and info re: shooter?

[soothsayer]

6. Young guy in his 20s is all I've seen

[Effete Snob]

12. Prevent it how?

What's the expectation here?

Anyone in your family can call the police, say they think you are a potential shooter, and the police will come and lock you up?

What do you want the police to do to people who aren't doing anything illegal?

[stopdiggin]

15. thanks. that AND mental health situations.

it's not that LE won't come -- it's just that there is such a limited amount that they can do.

(still -- calling somebody is better than not calling. maybe you'll be extraordinarily lucky on one particular day.)

[Midnight Writer]

16. Exactly. The law says a bad guy with a gun is presumed a good guy right up until he opens fire.

[Effete Snob]

20. Depends on the gun

That's one thing people don't seem to get about gun laws.

The "what are you going to do, come and take them away" crowd doesn't understand that it is not necessary to go around confiscating guns as a primary mission.

But, get pulled over for running a stop sign and have an assault weapon in your back seat? Now you have a new problem on your hands.

Police come to your house for a domestic disturbance and there is a 40 round magazine in the living room? Uh-oh.

You don't have to come and take away people's guns when simply having the guns is a potential liability which makes it a lot harder to take them to the range, drive around with them, or have them in plain view when smokey comes around lawfully for some other reason.

But I never get this whole "Family members warned..." stuff. Yeah, your fucked-up crack addict cousin can call the police, tell them he thinks you are planning to shoot up a school, and you have a new agenda for your afternoon. And, no, the cousin isn't going to get into any trouble for falsely reporting a crime because THERE WAS NO CRIME.

"Oh, you mean he's not going to shoot up a school. Well, okay then. I feel a lot better now, because I sure thought he was."

What a dumb ass idea - report a family member to the police and they'll come and "prevent" a shooting.

[orleans]

39. check out the posts below on red flag laws nt

[Effete Snob]

44. They are profoundly misinformed

Indiana has a red flag law.

The cops could not take away this persons guns because family members said so.

https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-35-criminal-law-and-procedure/in-code-sect-35-47-14-1.html

https://codes.findlaw.com/in/title-35-criminal-law-and-procedure/in-code-sect-35-47-14-2.html



Sec. 2 . A circuit or superior court may issue a warrant to search for and seize a firearm in the possession of an individual who is dangerous if:

(1)?a law enforcement officer provides the court a sworn affidavit that:

(A)?states why the law enforcement officer believes that the individual is dangerous and in possession of a firearm; ?and

(B)?describes the law enforcement officer's interactions and conversations with:

(i)?the individual who is alleged to be dangerous; ?or

(ii)?another individual, if the law enforcement officer believes that information obtained from this individual is credible and reliable;

that have led the law enforcement officer to believe that the individual is dangerous and in possession of a firearm;

(2)?the affidavit specifically describes the location of the firearm; ?and

(3)?the circuit or superior court determines that probable cause exists to believe that the individual is:

(A)?dangerous; ?and

(B)?in possession of a firearm.

[dpibel]

58. Family member equals "another individual"

If you're arguing that the procedure is not "Family member calls cop, copy takes gun," then you are arguing against a straw man.

What you have quoted clearly provides that credible information from a family member can provide the basis for a court order confiscating weapons.

[Effete Snob]

61. It "can"

But I believe we need to make it harder to obtain and own guns in the first place, instead of coming up with Rube Goldberg schemes for getting them away from people who shouldn't have them.

Do you know how often anyone ends up taking away lions from people who shouldn't have them?

I mean, yeah, sure, it happens - usually in situations where they had them illegally in the first place or weren't taking care of them properly, but it is amazing when you think of all of the places that are allowed to keep lions. There are zoos, animal parks, rescue organizations, circuses, entertainers, and a whole damn long list of people who are allowed to have and keep lions.

Lions are really dangerous animals, and they hardly ever get out from the places where they are kept and hurt people. Yes, very rarely, but, again, it's not because we have some kind of complicated legal process for getting lions away from people who shouldn't have them.

It's because we are careful about who we allow to have them, and the conditions for keeping them, in the first place!

Nobody ever calls the police and says, "I'm really scared. My neighbor has lions, and I think he might let them loose and hurt people with them."

[IL Dem]

31. Some states have "red flag" laws to try to address this.

Don't know about IN.

The purpose would be to remove the guns from the person's possession.

[wnylib]

33. NY has red flag laws. If a family member

or friend reports someone, the person gets a psych eval and could be required to surrender his/her guns.

In cases of domestic violence, threats of suicide, or threats against other persons, the guns are confiscated.

[Effete Snob]

40. That's not actually true

Your belief is quaint, but has no basis in reality.

This is what you have to do:

https://ww2.nycourts.gov/erpo

It is similar to filing for a protective order. You have to file a petition with the court.

And you have to pay a filing fee of $210.

This is STEP 4 of the process:

" 4. Complete an Application to Waive Extreme Risk Protection Order Filing Fees, and print it to file with the court.

By law, the court clerk must charge a $210 fee to assign an index number to a Supreme Court case. District attorneys, police and public school officials are not required to pay the fee. But, the law requires school officials from private schools and members of the respondent’s family or household to pay. You can ask the court to waive the fee by completing and attaching a fee waiver application form. If you attach this form to your ERPO application, the clerk will take your papers and bring them to the judge without payment of the fee. The judge will decide your application for an ERPO and will also decide if you must pay the fee. The fee waiver decision is completely separate from the judge’s decision on your ERPO application. Use the fillable online fee waiver application form to complete and print your fee waiver request, and file it with the court along with your ERPO application."

Whomever explained the NY red flag law to you was not telling you the truth.

[wnylib]

47. I did not say that there was no process

involved or that confiscation is automatic without a process.

[Effete Snob]

59. IMHO we need to focus on regulating gun ownership

Indiana had a red flag process.

A lot of these kinds of "people thought the guy was nuts" things simply do not rise to the level that would result in anything productive under red flag laws.

They are nowhere near as simple as people think they are.

[SoonerPride]

37. Take away their guns. Red flag laws work

And are a good place to start

[Effete Snob]

41. Indiana HAS a red flag law

So, obviously it didn't "work".

But it seems there is an idea that red flag laws consist of "report someone and the cops take their guns away."

No red flag law works that way.

[Miguelito Loveless]

2. If only the police

were not so preoccupied with gunning down every Black man, woman, and child in America, and took the time to follow up on these things.

[MoonRiver]

4. +1000

[malaise]

5. THIS

Wish I could rec your post

[gopiscrap]

8. exactly

[uponit7771]

9. +1, they're supper afraid of us and every other person gets shot

[Blue Owl]

10. Oh and don't forget elderly dementia patients

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215342524

[Miguelito Loveless]

46. Yep, all of those terrifying "thugs" who make them

"fear for their life".

[csziggy]

19. Maybe instead of spending money on militarizing the police

We could spend money on providing mental health professionals to assist the people who are recognized with problems BEFORE they go violent.

In this case after the family called the police there could have been someone available to send out to talk to the family and to get the young man into counseling before he shot others and was killed himself.

We need a number other than 911 - which should be reserved for active emergencies - for people to call for help for loved ones having a mental health crisis, as well as for people who need medical or financial assistance. In this area there is 211:

who we are

Just as you would call 9-1-1 for emergencies, you can call 2-1-1 for human service information and assistance. We are available 24 hours a day to listen and provide emotional support, crisis counseling, suicide prevention, and information & referrals. You do not have to be in crisis to call, there is no eligibility criteria, and our services are free. They help you navigate through the maze of community services in a nonjudgmental manner. Because life is 24/7, so are we!
?https://www.211bigbend.org/about211

Something like that should be everywhere and should be promoted everywhere - schools, jobs, billboards, etc. Most people are not aware of this service in our area, and it would help if it were universal.

[AZProgressive]

22. That won't solve the gun violence issue

The US has similar rates of mental illness as other countries but they don't have the same rate on gun violence.

The gun violence issue will never be solved if we continue to focus on mental illness.

[csziggy]

25. Are other countries better at helping with mental health issures?

If they are, that could be the key.

I was mostly responding to the concept that this man's family recognized there was the problem, but their only known recourse was to warn the police who are completely unable to deal with mental health issues. There should be alternatives for families to go to when they are worried.

Sure, helping those who are having issues is not the whole problem - but I see no way to reduce the numbers of guns in our society. If we tried taking people's guns away, the borderline personalities that tend to stockpile guns will go over the edge and it will be non-stop bloodshed.

[AZProgressive]

30. 1% of gun homicides is committed by someone with a SMI

Only 3%-5% of violent crimes are committed by someone with a mental illness. Mentally ill are in fact more likely than the general population to be victims of violent crime.

The US has the highest rate of gun ownership out of developed countries and the highest rate of gun violence.

[wnylib]

55. You don't have to have a diagnosed

mental illness to seek, receive, and benefit from counseling. Anger management issues can be worked on in counseling. You can't force someone to go for counseling, but you can try an intervention. Relatives and friends can work with counselors on coping with the person's behavior and ways to approach the subject of counseling.

I wonder if the relative who reported him as dangerous heard him specifically mention his target. In a case like that, maybe all you can do is tell the intended target, if you know who it is. If it's a place of business, they can add a security detail.

[Bev54]

57. No I am Canadian and we are not better at helping with mental illness

We are getting better but not there yet. What we do not have is a culture of guns, we are not consumed by them, we don't have gun fetishes' and we control guns and ban the bad ones. There is something in the American culture of the 2nd amendment that until you change that, nothing is going to change there. Too many nut jobs with penis extensions.

[Miguelito Loveless]

48. Well, we could start by hiring fewer cops

who are either psychos, bullies, or snow flakes afraid for their lives that when dealing with people with dark skin (or the elderly)

[AZProgressive]

50. I actually support the policy of reducing police budgets

To fund mental health and if they would have mental health professionals respond to mental health crisis rather than police that would also be safer for those with mental illness.

On the gun violence I take a different approach but I also agree with your idea as well. I do think police could Dona better job of screening recruits.

[Miguelito Loveless]

52. Agreed.

Any thug with a GED and a clean record seems to get a badge and a gun.

[csziggy]

63. Yes, that was what was behind the "Defund the Police" movement

But it was a bad phrase and didn't express what is wanted and needed. We need to spend less on cops and their military surplus equipment and more on people with the training to de-escalate and to deal with mental and other issues.

Look at the handling of the woman with likely dementia issues, the various badly dealt with situations with autistic or mentally handicapped people, anger issues (many of which lead to domestic violence), and the other things that don't need a trigger happy cop. That's when we need people that know how to deal with humans and not enemies.

There will be gun violence until we heal our culture and take away the desire for a gun as an emotional crutch - but this would be a step in the right direction.

[Miguelito Loveless]

45. Perhaps we could fire all the people who "train"

the police and replace them with Norwegian instructors?

https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/4-swedish-cops-on-vacation-break-up-nyc-subway-fight-1.2343606

[csziggy]

62. Or perhaps Swedish police instructors

Since the article you reference is about Swedish cops, not Norwegian.

[Miguelito Loveless]

65. You are correct

And I think it has been a long month already.

[gibraltar72]

3. They protected his 2A rights. When does this end??

[Crunchy Frog]

29. It doesn't end. Any attempt at ending it provokes a massive backlash,

and we just end up even worse off.

There won't be any last straw. People will simply get used to ever higher levels of violence and accept it as the new normal.

I'm very fatalistic about this.

[dianaredwing]

54. Unfortunately

I agree with you. How many mass shootings have we had since the beginning of the year? It's insane, but I have to admit that I didn't even read the story. You get numb, and I don't know how to get un-numb. I don't post platitudes because I really don't think they have much of an effect. I haven't lost anyone to gun violence so maybe I don't even deserve a say here, but unless we can somehow make it difficult for people to obtain assault weapons, I too am fatalistic.

[Mike Nelson]

7. I think...

... people threaten to kill each other all the time. How do we know when to take a threat seriously? Maybe when family members report their own son/father/whatever may be planning a violent act.

[Probatim]

11. Family members know best.

In healthcare, many children's hospitals have a procedure in place where parent can request a second care team to come in if they don't feel their concerns are being met.

The idea is that a parent knows when a child isn't doing well - they know their children better than the doctors and nurses and would more easily spot a downturn than someone caring for 10 others.

The same could/should apply here - a parent of a young person with anxiety, or worse, is the first person to recognize when they've taken a downturn.

This is a damn shame.

[7wo7rees]

13. Absolutely when a family member is warning.....

But, I am eldest of 3 and I warned everyone our father was dangerous for over 15 years. I was not taken seriously until 2006 when he was threatening to kill a brother, his family and our mother. They all went into hiding.

It took several days, attys and judges, before police would do anything. Finally the house was surrounded by SWAT team, he was tricked into coming out of house and was put away until his death in 2015. He had over 50 loaded guns of all types all over the house!! My father went to gun shows all the time and always came home with more.

Sometimes (most times?) no one listens until it is too late. (Especially if you are white and live in a nice area where these things just don't happen).

[stopdiggin]

17. and even here -- you were a bit LUCKY to actually

get any action taken. The usual mantra is, "not until he's actually done something ..."

[7wo7rees]

28. So very true. Did not find out till much later he nearly killed our mother.

One evening he was "cleaning" an "unloaded" gun. Our mother was sitting across the room in her rocking chair. The gun went off, narrowly missing her. The bullet hole was in the wall. Our mother never told till he was safely away, permanently. She enabled him for years, only God knows why......

So yes, completely agree!! We were all very lucky.

[Wicked Blue]

43. I'm so sorry for what you and your family endured

[7wo7rees]

49. Thank you.. appreciate the kind thoughts.

We all survived. The trauma and divisions though, resulted in a rather not close group of siblings. At least though, no one was shot or killed. Back to that word, "lucky". I consider us all to be fortunate.

My father should never have been allowed to purchase so many guns!! He was under a dr's care since partial removal of brain tumor in '91. That surgery resulted in TBI and he was dangerous.

[Effete Snob]

14. What should law enforcement do about that?

I'm trying to understand the expectation in situations like this.

If I call the police, say I'm related to someone and I think they might commit a violent crime, then what should happen next?

[csziggy]

21. The police could refer you to the appropriate human service

See my post above about the local 211 service - https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=15342951

But we have militarized police who are happy, even eager, to trot out there with their body armor and weapons. And who are NOT trained to de-escalate or to deal with mental health issues - but who also don't know where to go for that kind of help.

[Effete Snob]

23. "North Carolina teenager prompts 911 calls after practicing ROTC routine outside"

[stopdiggin]

32. hey. I'm calling the cops on this guy too.

If he didn't have any idea that his neighbors might be upset .. perhaps he should have?
(but then again -- sixteen -- not always the best at making decisions)

[cannabis_flower]

38. And....

I’d be calling if he was white, black, Hispanic or Asian. This is an activity for the back yard. Looks like a nice neighborhood, he didn’t have a fenced backyard to practice in?

[stopdiggin]

42. he did. and chose not too. ??? (nt)

[Miguelito Loveless]

51. If the danger is imminent

("He said he was going to back to the office to show them he wouldn't be pushed around. He left with a rifle), then the police are called.

Vaguer threats of potential harm should be discussed withing the family to assess the problem, with mental health professionals consulted if anyone think it is serious.

[Sancho]

18. People Control, Not Gun Control

This is my generic response to gun threads where people are shot and killed by the dumb or criminal possession of guns. For the record, I grew up in the South and on military bases. I was taught about firearms as a child, and I grew up hunting, was a member of the NRA, and I still own guns. In the 70’s, I dropped out of the NRA because they become more radical and less interested in safety and training. Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and posses a gun no matter how illogical it was for them to have a gun. Also, easy access to more powerful guns, guns in the hands of children, and guns that weren’t secured are out of control in our society. As such, here’s what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. I’m not debating the legal language, I just think it’s the reasonable way to stop the shootings. Notice, none of this restricts the type of guns sold. This is aimed at the people who shoot others, because it’s clear that they should never have had a gun.

1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learner’s license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impounded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.

Most of you know that a license is no big deal. Besides a driver’s license you need a license to fish, operate a boat, or many other activities. I realize these differ by state, but that is not a reason to let anyone without a bit of sense pack a semiautomatic weapon in public, on the roads, and in schools. I think we need to make it much harder for some people to have guns.

For those who want to argue legality, please reference: The Second Amendment: A Biography by Michael Waldman

[Crunchy Frog]

35. I think that could work very well, but I don't believe...

that it could ever actually be implemented in this society.

I mean, we live in a country where we can't even get people to wear masks and socially distance during a deadly pandemic, because "freedom".

I'm coming to the conclusion that this problem is simply unsolvable in our society.

[Sancho]

60. read this book...

The Second Amendment: A Biography by Michael Waldman

It's a good overview.

[Crunchy Frog]

24. It would have been an intolerable infringement of his freedumb if anyone had acted on that.

This is just the way we have to live now.

[hauckeye]

26. If we had red flag laws they could have kicked in

[Roc2020]

27. Could it seriously be that modern policing is as outdated as landlines?

If they can't prevent mass murderers even after being warned, but can mace soldiers, shoot people over air fresheners, strangle a man with their knee and shooting 13yr olds.. I mean I'm not for defunding and abolish the police but it does make me wonder if armed uniformed cops driving patrol cars are relevant or necessary.

[littlemissmartypants]

34. Domestic violence and mass murders are inextricably linked.

There's tons of research that supports this. Every time there's a domestic violence report, call, complaint, comment on social media post or hand written note that communicates a threat based on power and control of another person... every frog killer, cat skinner, dog tail and ear trimmer or mom who consistently avoids eye contact with others for fear of being beaten later, needs to be reported post haste in an attempt to quash mass murderers. If cops weren't so busy trying to murder every person of color they see and took some time to really get to know the people in their neighborhood, like human beings, much of this could be avoided.

[Warpy]

36. Cops couldn't do anything beyond maybe talking to him

his family might have known he was in trouble and might have known he needed help but getting an adult help against his wishes is impossible. "Danger to oneself or others" is far too narrowly interpreted and didn't apply until he started to shoot people.

That is a huge part of the problem, families are crying for help but no help is to be had. They knew.

[DallasNE]

53. How Many Times Has This Story Played Out?

Was this person on meds at the time of this massacre? Not likely. And was he known to have a gun?

As far as I know, there are no institutions that will take these people in once they have reached 18 so there is no way to force them to take their meds. And how can you pry a gun away from someone once they have legally purchased it? Clearly, our laws are screwed up and they aren't about to change. This is the new normal - thoughts and prayers galore - along with all of the dead bodies.

[NBachers]

56. Sorry, I tried reading this thread, but I just couldn't make it even halfway.

[Takket]

64. For what it is worth

The mother called the police some time last year. So this was not some recent thing she did just before the killings.