BREAKING: Shooting in downtown Jacksonville FL, multiple fatalities

[Rogue 9]

NPR

Sheriff: 'Multiple Fatalities' After Shooting In Downtown Jacksonville

August 26, 20182:44 PM ET

A "mass shooting" has taken place at a shopping center in downtown Jacksonville, Fla., according to the sheriff's office, resulting in "multiple fatalities."

It happened at a Madden video game tournament, according to multiple reports.

"Stay far away from the area. The area is not safe at this time," the sheriff said in a tweet. "STAY AWAY."

"Multiple fatalities at the scene, many transported," the sheriff added. "One suspect is dead at the scene, unknown at this time if we have a second suspect."

The incident happened at The Jacksonville Landing, a waterfront shopping mall and live entertainment space in downtown.

"The tourney just got shot up," said a player named Drini Gjoka. "I am literally so lucky. The bullet hit my thumb. ... Worst day of my life."

The sheriff said SWAT teams are conducting searches of the area and asked people at the scene to remain hidden in place and call 911.

Florida Gov. Rick Scott said he's spoken to the sheriff's office "to offer any state resources he may need."

No other information was immediately available.

This is a developing story. Some things that get reported by the media will later turn out to be wrong. We will focus on reports from police officials and other authorities, credible news outlets and reporters who are at the scene. We will update as the situation develops.

[Rogue 9]

Updates: The venue reports its staff are all safe and accounted for.

[Elheru Aran]

Three dead including the shooter. Seems to have been a situation where the shooter was quite literally a very bad loser-- he was playing competitively, lost, and happened to be packing. May not have been premediated... but you'd think such a setting would ban live weapons.

[Zaune]

Three dead including the shooter. Seems to have been a situation where the shooter was quite literally a very bad loser-- he was playing competitively, lost, and happened to be packing. May not have been premediated... but you'd think such a setting would ban live weapons.

Even if they made it a rule that nobody could bring in a gun even if they had a valid CCL, nothing short of setting up metal detectors or body-searching everyone who enters the venue could stop someone sneaking in a weapon of some sort if they were really determined to do so. That would entail hiring extra security staff, which doesn't come cheap. I suspect we're going to see some smaller, lower-profile e-sports tournaments forced to close down because they can't afford it now that this has happened.

[The Romulan Republic]

Three dead including the shooter. Seems to have been a situation where the shooter was quite literally a very bad loser-- he was playing competitively, lost, and happened to be packing. May not have been premediated... but you'd think such a setting would ban live weapons.

You'd think, but... its Florida.

May the dead rest in peace, my the injured make a full recovery, and may their friends and family receive whatever support they need. And may this atrocity provide further impetus to the ongoing push for gun control, as well as larger social reforms.

Unfortunately, I suspect that it will lead to another round of the "video games cause shootings" deflection tactic.

[TheFeniX]

I'm actually betting against that: The Madden series has always been in the realm of socially acceptable gaming and no one likes taking swipes at the American obsession with HandEgg.

If this were Counter-Strike or League of Legends: we wouldn't even be having this conversation because they'd already be tooting that horn.

[MKSheppard]

So....

The shooter recently bought his .40 cal and 9mm handguns in MD within the last month or so as a resident of Baltimore, MD.

Maryland for those of you who don't live here:

Considers Handguns and certain types of rifles (aka ASSAULTY WEAPONZ) to be "regulated weapons".

1.) Have required registration of all "regulated" weapons sold through dealers since 1966.

2.) Have required registration of all "regulated" weapons sold privately since 1996.

Basically, the "GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE" is closed for handguns and Universal Background Checks have been in effect for 20+ years for handguns.

3.) Seven Day Waiting Period since forever for "regulated" weapons.

4.) Since 2013, in order to purchase a "regulated" weapon, you need to have a "Handgun Qualification License".

To get the HQL, there's a training component (about four hours classroom instruction followed by range qualification) which can be waived if you have a hunter's certificate, or you are former military (Form DD214).

Then you have to be fingerprinted, and your fingerprints are used as a way of validating your ID and you are washed through the following databases -- I know this because people have posted their HQL clearance rates online on when they were cleared by such database on such date:

NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System)

METERS (Maryland Electronic Telecommunications and Enforcement Resource System)

CJIS (Criminal Justice Information Services) -- run by the FBI.

MAFSS (Maryland Automated Firearms Services System) -- is the official record of regulated firearms, including handguns, in the State, and records firearms information and data from the registration applications. MAFSS is also used for a variety of law enforcement purposes, such as to assist in investigating crimes. The Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services is responsible for the maintenance and security of MAFSS. According to MAFSS, as of May 12, 2015, there were approximately 1.1 million regulated firearms registered to approximately 700,000 individuals in Maryland."

JIS (Judicial Information Systems)

DJS (Department of Juvenile Services)

DHMH (Department of Health and Mental Hygiene)

------------

So why is the above important?

from twitter:

"Records obtained by @AP show #JacksonvilleLanding shooter had been hospitalized for mental illness. Divorce papers from parents David Katz of Baltimore show he was twice hospitalized in psychiatric facilities & was prescribed anti-psychotic + anti-depressant medications."

...

"Jacksonville shooter David Katz parents’ divorce, first filed in 2005, reveal Katz’s emotional and social struggles, as well as his troubles in school. The documents note a hospitalization at Sheppard Pratt Health System in Towson for psychiatric treatment."

So uh....

Wouldn't the Department of Juvenile Services and Department of Health and Mental Hygiene databases that MSP consults before issuing a Handgun Qualification license, show this stuff, and thus deny him the HQL?

You can't transfer a handgun in MD without one as it is. (Katz was too young to get a handgun before 2013).

EDIT:

This means the killer passed no less than 3 Maryland State Police background checks, including dives into 16 state databases and 3 federal background checks -- 1 series of both for the HQL and another two for each handgun. This supposes he didn't buy the two handguns at the same time, but he'd still go thru the state stuff twice.

[Elheru Aran]

Shep... so the background check system failed to pick up on the red flags... what's your point? You tend to make these massive data-dumps whenever there's a shooting without ever really elaborating on what point you're trying to make. At least this one is related to the actual shooter and isn't just a load of information from Maryland or a random NRA databyte from 1967 or whatever.

Anyway, yeah, it's a pretty long stretch from video handegg to shooting people. I mean we will probably have that argument being made soon enough, but everybody born since the 70s or so these days has grown up with at least -some- incarnation of a sports game, and Madden is one of the biggest names out there, having been published since... what... mid 90s at least? starting on the N64 or original PS or whatever. People definitely know that one.

[MKSheppard]

Shep... so the background check system failed to pick up on the red flags... what's your point?

Failed to pick up on Red Flags? He was involuntarily committed twice to mental facilities!

This isn't "he said something mean back in 9th grade" level, this is a serious fuckup; all the more so irritating because the entire rationale they used to fuck us Marylanders over back in 2013 with the Firearms Safety Act was that it would hypothetically prevent these kinds of incidents.

All the more so that one of the places he was involuntarily committed to was in Towson, MD; something that would report back to the Maryland Department of Mental Health and Hygiene; as opposed to Bumfuck Hospital in Upstate NY which wouldn't report back to Maryland DMHH

[Zaune]

I'd also like to point out that while there'd probably be fewer total casualties if he hadn't been able to get hold of a gun, we could well be reading the headline "Florida Man Fatally Stabbed Over Esports Tournament Result" instead.

Keeping firearms out of the hands of people who can't be trusted to use them lawfully and responsibly is definitely a good idea, but it's not the solution to all violent crime ever.

[Jub]

I'd also like to point out that while there'd probably be fewer total casualties if he hadn't been able to get hold of a gun, we could well be reading the headline "Florida Man Fatally Stabbed Over Esports Tournament Result" instead.

Keeping firearms out of the hands of people who can't be trusted to use them lawfully and responsibly is definitely a good idea, but it's not the solution to all violent crime ever.

True, but you can stop people from carrying (openly or concealed) and restrict other dedicated melee weapons down by having legitimate use laws in place. Sure you can stab people with a screwdriver or knock them in the head with a tire iron but in most cases, the severity of the damage a would be spree-shooter can do is greatly limited. There'll always be outliers but in general, guns are far deadlier than modern (modern meaning repeating cartridge based firearms) non-gun options.

Of course, in this case, the guns are less the issue than a likely, underfunded and overworked system missing serious red flags and letting somebody that obviously shouldn't have a gun have one and more than that gave him permission to carry it in public.

[Patroklos]

Of course, in this case, the guns are less the issue than a likely, underfunded and overworked system missing serious red flags and letting somebody that obviously shouldn't have a gun have one and more than that gave him permission to carry it in public.

I am not sure what "permission" to carry in public has to do with the incident. Unless he was unambiguously open carrying prior to the incident, and that particular detail is somehow significant, people are going to carry whatever weapon they want concealed if they are inclined to do so whether they have permission or not.

The method of carry is rarely relevant to these events, its whether they should have been allowed to buy, which addresses the most carry concerns up ahead of time.

[Jub]

I am not sure what "permission" to carry in public has to do with the incident. Unless he was unambiguously open carrying prior to the incident, and that particular detail is somehow significant, people are going to carry whatever weapon they want concealed if they are inclined to do so whether they have permission or not.

The method of carry is rarely relevant to these events, its whether they should have been allowed to buy, which addresses the most carry concerns up ahead of time.

I disagree. Career criminals aside, which this guy surely isn't, people don't tend to carry firearms concealed or otherwise in places where carrying firearms outside of the range or hunting area is prohibited. See Canada, where pistols are legal but permits for open/concealed carry are vanishingly rare, for proof of this fact.

You'll get a fair bit of mileage just by going just short of banning any form of firearm carrying outside of the home, range, or hunting area and enforcing strict transport laws. That way when the cops see or suspect somebody of carrying a weapon they have near bulletproof cause to search them, possibly arrest them, and confiscate the weapon. This gets weapons off the street and means that it's harder for idiots like this asshole to get a gun into a populated area.

I know that the US is being increasingly blind when it comes to gun control in the face of increasing numbers of mass shootings but for fuck's sake quit acting like the solutions most other nations on the planet are using are some form of witchcraft fueled rocket science.

[Patroklos]

The data doesn't support your position. CCL permits are a thing in most states (FL being one of them), meaning there is permission for carrying concealed firearms in public, and CCL holders have a vanishingly small rate of gun crime participation. Yet despite this imposition of legal requirements on concealed carry, US gun crime is not near zero.

I am not aware of any instance of an open carry situation leading to a mass shooting in the US, but if you know of one please share. I am also unaware of any instance where law enforcement was frustrated in intercepting a supposed carrying individual who then shortly carried out a mass shooting, but again let me know if you do have an incident in mind. I would also point out that outlawing firearm carry will only have a significant impact if it is coupled with a robust method to detect illegal carry, and right now no such method exists outside of initiatives like NYC's stop-and-frisk which is not exactly a law enforcement method championed around here.

You are going down the old tired road of "people would have respected the law and not have done an illegal act (carry), even though they just performed an far more heinous illegal act (shooting people)." Nobody planning a mass shooting is going to be deterred by the illegality of gun transport, because they have already come to terms with the illegality of murdering people. You might have a point when we are talking about heat of the moment interactions. Two dudes start arguing and because one has a gun on hand they end up using it in a fit or rage. Mass shootings, however, do not follow that pattern and are actual the exact opposite. Even this one in FL, while not the meticulously planned and rehearsed Columbine type situation, still had the guy to leave for an extended period of time and return.

Your idea might also work (somewhat) if mass shooters were habitual gun carriers, meaning a likely potential mass shooter might be stopped and and be wrapped up in some unrelated law enforcement actions prior to their future mass shooting. I don't think that's the case though, that mass shooters are generally and regularly packing, thus exposing themselves to this drag net effect.

[Beowulf]

I disagree. Career criminals aside, which this guy surely isn't, people don't tend to carry firearms concealed or otherwise in places where carrying firearms outside of the range or hunting area is prohibited. See Canada, where pistols are legal but permits for open/concealed carry are vanishingly rare, for proof of this fact.

You'll get a fair bit of mileage just by going just short of banning any form of firearm carrying outside of the home, range, or hunting area and enforcing strict transport laws. That way when the cops see or suspect somebody of carrying a weapon they have near bulletproof cause to search them, possibly arrest them, and confiscate the weapon. This gets weapons off the street and means that it's harder for idiots like this asshole to get a gun into a populated area.

I know that the US is being increasingly blind when it comes to gun control in the face of increasing numbers of mass shootings but for fuck's sake quit acting like the solutions most other nations on the planet are using are some form of witchcraft fueled rocket science.

This guy apparently had the pistol in his car, and after he lost, he went to the car, then came back and started shooting. I don't see how any of what you're talking about would have stopped it. Additionally, the property owner had it a declared "gun free zone".

[Jub]

You are going down the old tired road of "people would have respected the law and not have done an illegal act (carry), even though they just performed an far more heinous illegal act (shooting people)." Nobody planning a mass shooting is going to be deterred by the illegality of gun transport, because they have already come to terms with the illegality of murdering people. You might have a point when we are talking about heat of the moment interactions. Two dudes start arguing and because one has a gun on hand they end up using it in a fit or rage. Mass shootings, however, do not follow that pattern and are actual the exact opposite. Even this one in FL, while not the meticulously planned and rehearsed Columbine type situation, still had the guy to leave for an extended period of time and return.

Then why don't more people, in general, and not just career criminals, carry concealed firearms north of the border? The average person up here isn't carrying, guns have to be locked up and stored separate from ammo, so we don't have firearms for self-defense and yet it's rare to see any kind of shooting that doesn't have a gang connection. Clearly, this is a case where our more restrictive firearms laws are a part of the solution.

I know the counter-argument is going to be something like "there are too many guns in the US for this to work' or 'Canada has better social safety nets and less of a gun culture' or something and those are certainly factors but why the opposition to anything that might shave off a few percentage points when it comes to gun crime?

Your idea might also work (somewhat) if mass shooters were habitual gun carriers, meaning a likely potential mass shooter might be stopped and and be wrapped up in some unrelated law enforcement actions prior to their future mass shooting. I don't think that's the case though, that mass shooters are generally and regularly packing, thus exposing themselves to this drag net effect.

So you're saying that this Madden shooter brought a gun because he thought he might get into a fight after losing at a video game?

Not to mention that just having the gun in his car would have been illegal in Canada. You can't stop without very good reason while transporting a firearm between a designed place and your home. There are additional storage restrictions as well, especially for restricted firearms like pistols that would have given this guy even more time to cool off between the initial altercation and the shooting.

This guy apparently had the pistol in his car, and after he lost, he went to the car, then came back and started shooting. I don't see how any of what you're talking about would have stopped it. Additionally, the property owner had it a declared "gun free zone".

As stated in my reply to Patroklos that would have been illegal in Canada. Not to mention that how he had it stored was also unlikely to be legal in Canada. The mag capacity would likely have been illegal in Canada. His ownership of the weapon at all, unless he's registered with a pistol shooting club would also have been illegal. Though in this particular case the shooter should already have been denied the purchase of a firearm and denied any sort of carry permit due to his mental state.

[Beowulf]

This guy apparently had the pistol in his car, and after he lost, he went to the car, then came back and started shooting. I don't see how any of what you're talking about would have stopped it. Additionally, the property owner had it a declared "gun free zone".

As stated in my reply to Patroklos that would have been illegal in Canada. Not to mention that how he had it stored was also unlikely to be legal in Canada. The mag capacity would likely have been illegal in Canada. His ownership of the weapon at all, unless he's registered with a pistol shooting club would also have been illegal. Though in this particular case the shooter should already have been denied the purchase of a firearm and denied any sort of carry permit due to his mental state.

Great! so after he commits murder, you can add on charges of carrying the gun in a car, not going directly to or from a range, not securing it during transport, bringing a gun into a gun free zone, and having an illegally high capacity magazine. Cool. Doesn't actually stop him from killing people. And he shot himself in the end, so the charges are moot.

Yeah, he should have been denied. But that's entirely the fault of the damn government for failing to actually deny the purchase. He was a Maryland resident, you can't buy handguns out of state, and that state has "universal background checks". So either the background check didn't pick up that he should be denied, or "universal background checks" don't prevent people from getting guns.

[Jub]

Great! so after he commits murder, you can add on charges of carrying the gun in a car, not going directly to or from a range, not securing it during transport, bringing a gun into a gun free zone, and having an illegally high capacity magazine. Cool. Doesn't actually stop him from killing people. And he shot himself in the end, so the charges are moot.

Yeah, he should have been denied. But that's entirely the fault of the damn government for failing to actually deny the purchase. He was a Maryland resident, you can't buy handguns out of state, and that state has "universal background checks". So either the background check didn't pick up that he should be denied, or "universal background checks" don't prevent people from getting guns.

Sure, miss the forest for the trees. If you start to chip away at the gun culture in the US you'll save lives. Make carrying a weapon in public a vanishingly rare occurrence, make proper storage and transport laws, restrict handguns. These are all things that don't violate the constitution that could, if enforced, reduce gun deaths in the US significantly.

They might not have worked in this case but if they were implemented twenty years ago culture might have changed enough that this guy never bought a gun or was denied his permit. So instead of kicking the can down the road yet again, banning some new thing that looks scary, or just sending 'thoughts and prayers' do something. Worst case it costs a few bucks and doesn't work but just like in dealing with climate change the risk is small compared to the potential reward.

[Patroklos]

]
Then why don't more people, in general, and not just career criminals, carry concealed firearms north of the border?

Because you made it illegal to do so? I fail to see how this is relevant. We are talking about criminals doing illegal things, are you saying criminals in Canada respect carry restrictions and THAT is the reason Canadian gun crime is low? That there is nothing else that eclipses this niche concept of yours that more readily explains the disparity?

You are making the argument that preventing the carry of firearms for any reason, but still allowing ownership, in and of itself reduces gun violence. You have made no logical connection substantiating this connection.

The average person up here isn't carrying, guns have to be locked up and stored separate from ammo, so we don't have firearms for self-defense and yet it's rare to see any kind of shooting that doesn't have a gang connection. Clearly, this is a case where our more restrictive firearms laws are a part of the solution.

"Restrictive firearms laws" and "this specific fire arm law in isolation" are not valid comparisons. And like you said you still have gun violence when criminals want to commit gun violence.

I know the counter-argument is going to be something like "there are too many guns in the US for this to work' or 'Canada has better social safety nets and less of a gun culture' or something and those are certainly factors but why the opposition to anything that might shave off a few percentage points when it comes to gun crime?

When you are discussing the restriction of civil rights "I'll try spinning, that's a good trick!" is not an acceptable strategy. If you want to implement this specific thing, you need to support why it would work in the context of the situation it will be implemented, and explain why all the data available (CCL holders don't commit gun crimes of note/despite there being carry laws criminals carry anyway) doesn't support your policy proposal.

]
So you're saying that this Madden shooter brought a gun because he thought he might get into a fight after losing at a video game?

No. There is no logical way you can come to that conclusion.

You stated that by making gun carry illegal, anyone the cops suspect of carrying a gun can be instantly searched. What I said, in that context is:

1.) That only matters if there is a legitimate means to substantiate probable cause for a search that isn't of the controversial stop and frisk sort, and can be applied so prolifically that people intentionally trying to conceal weapons can be searched at a rate that's statistically relevant. If you have that, then you have to prove that this likelihood of being searched would impact the risk assessment of people so callus and risk accepting that they are already are willing to murder people (or lots of people), vice people who would carry for non criminal reasons such a self defense. I specifically asked you if this inability to search a person despite a law enforcement suspicion had failed to prevent a mass shooting. I know of none, and if you can't provide one you are proposing a solution in search of a problem.

2.) If you were expecting some non specific drag net effect, ie people who commit mass shootings regularly carry firearms on their person (illegally in your case), meaning potential mass shooters have a high chance of being nabbed in carry violations before they become mass shooters, they have to be habitual carriers. I do not get the impression this is the case, many mass shooting suspects steal their weapons from family or procure them specifically for the shooting they are planning.

Not to mention that just having the gun in his car would have been illegal in Canada. You can't stop without very good reason while transporting a firearm between a designed place and your home. There are additional storage restrictions as well, especially for restricted firearms like pistols that would have given this guy even more time to cool off between the initial altercation and the shooting.

Again, if there is someone with the lack of respect for the law and people that is indicated by walking into a video game tournament and opening fire, the idea he is going to be respecting your gun transport law is ridiculous.

Like I said, if you are talking about heat of the moment type gun violence, ie someone who is unlikely to engage in cold blooded gun violence but got lost in a specific charged circumstance (ie, normal human beings), that lack of proximity to a gun makes a difference. This is not the case for this incident, or mass shootings in general.

As stated in my reply to Patroklos that would have been illegal in Canada. Not to mention that how he had it stored was also unlikely to be legal in Canada. The mag capacity would likely have been illegal in Canada. His ownership of the weapon at all, unless he's registered with a pistol shooting club would also have been illegal. Though in this particular case the shooter should already have been denied the purchase of a firearm and denied any sort of carry permit due to his mental state.

Read what you said again, and then tell us the feature of all of that that would be the likely cause of the unlikely repetition of this event's circumstances in Canada. Then ask yourself if that transport feature would matter at all if the others were not in place, and how likely getting those features to exist in the US in the same inter layered causality relationship is (either through practicality, or desire).

Sure, miss the forest for the trees. If you start to chip away at the gun culture in the US you'll save lives. Make carrying a weapon in public a vanishingly rare occurrence, make proper storage and transport laws, restrict handguns. These are all things that don't violate the constitution that could, if enforced, reduce gun deaths in the US significantly.

Your idea here only makes sense if you attribute no value to the ability be be armed with the minimum necessary impact on lawful citizens. Thankfully when civil rights are in question in the US, the default is not to throw the baby out with the bath water. You obviously give no value to self defense carry of firearms. Your opinion is a minority in the US.

[Jub]

Because you made it illegal to do so? I fail to see how this is relevant. We are talking about criminals doing illegal things, are you saying criminals in Canada respect carry restrictions and THAT is the reason Canadian gun crime is low? That there is nothing else that eclipses this niche concept of yours that more readily explains the disparity?

Except that not all gun crime is carried out by people who were criminals beforehand. Taking away the opportunity reduces gun crime. Even if that crime is replaced by knife crime you've made these crimes, on average, less deadly than they would have been with a gun. It's not some magic cure, it's a layer that can be applied to chip away at gun deaths in the US.

"Restrictive firearms laws" and "this specific fire arm law in isolation" are not valid comparisons. And like you said you still have gun violence when criminals want to commit gun violence.

We have far less gun crime per capita and most of our gun crime is gang on gang with the occasional crime of passion or an innocent bystander hit. You don't get mugged with a gun, people rarely do armed home invasions, and it's rare to have something like a road rage shooting.

You've also seen my arguments before. I'm for vastly more restrictive gun laws than the US currently has across the board. I think Canadian levels of restriction, if strictly enforced, would do the US a lot of good.

When you are discussing the restriction of civil rights "I'll try spinning, that's a good trick!" is not an acceptable strategy. If you want to implement this specific thing, you need to support why it would work in the context of the situation it will be implemented, and explain why all the data available (CCL holders don't commit gun crimes of note/despite there being carry laws criminals carry anyway) doesn't support your policy proposal.

Okay, if gun laws have no effect why don't the other western nations relax their gun laws?

The US is the worst, supposedly, 1st world nation when it comes to gun crime and it's not even close. Yet everytime this comes up people aren't willing to accept any infringement on their 'right' to carry a gun into the grocery store. It doesn't make a lick of sense to literally do nothing, or what amounts to nothing, and yet still get upset of mass shootings.

No. There is no logical way you can come to that conclusion.

You made the case that spree shooters aren't everyday carry types. It seems like this one was so I brought it up.

1.) That only matters if there is a legitimate means to substantiate probable cause for a search that isn't of the controversial stop and frisk sort, and can be applied so prolifically that people intentionally trying to conceal weapons can be searched at a rate that's statistically relevant. If you have that, then you have to prove that this likelihood of being searched would impact the risk assessment of people so callus and risk accepting that they are already are willing to murder people (or lots of people), vice people who would carry for non criminal reasons such a self defense. I specifically asked you if this inability to search a person despite a law enforcement suspicion had failed to prevent a mass shooting. I know of none, and if you can't provide one you are proposing a solution in search of a problem.

We run roadside checks here and as long as they hit every car going through they're perfectly legal. It wouldn't catch everybody but if on any given day you might have to drive through a seatbelt check or drunk driving check that also searches you and your vehicle for a gun most people will stop carrying and some percentage of criminals will be caught before they commit a crime. It's not going to make a huge dent in the career criminal activity, but not all gun crime is done by those with prior records and if we can stop some fraction of those crimes it's a net positive.

This is hardly the only way to reduce gun crime but if you're not sure the law that is passed will be followed it's sure a decent start.

2.) If you were expecting some non specific drag net effect, ie people who commit mass shootings regularly carry firearms on their person (illegally in your case), meaning potential mass shooters have a high chance of being nabbed in carry violations before they become mass shooters, they have to be habitual carriers. I do not get the impression this is the case, many mass shooting suspects steal their weapons from family or procure them specifically for the shooting they are planning.

Which is why you have to enforce much stricter weapons and ammo storage laws as well. That, along with simply not allowing further handgun sales, outside of very restrictive circumstances, and not allowing transfers of existing handguns will reduce numbers drastically over the next couple of generations. It sucks to lose an investment but who said that life didn't suck sometimes?

Again, if there is someone with the lack of respect for the law and people that is indicated by walking into a video game tournament and opening fire, the idea he is going to be respecting your gun transport law is ridiculous.

Only he didn't just show up out of nowhere to shoot up a random event. He attended, got in a fight, went to his car, got his gun, and shot somebody. Yes he had more time to cool off than in some cases but this was still a crime of passion that could have been prevented with tighter gun control.

Read what you said again, and then tell us the feature of all of that that would be the likely cause of the unlikely repetition of this event's circumstances in Canada. Then ask yourself if that transport feature would matter at all if the others were not in place, and how likely getting those features to exist in the US in the same inter layered causality relationship is (either through practicality, or desire).

Every. Bit. Matters. This debate is never about a single event. It's about every shooting.

As for getting any of these ideas passed, frankly, the US is fucked in so many ways I don't know where to start. You'd rather argue over the right to bear arms than introduce a right to a universal social safety net. You elected Trump and haven't given him the boot yet. You complain about Trump when less than 40% of you vote. You built a nation on immigration and cheap labour and suddenly want to close your borders. You let entire cities rot for lack of any infrastructure maintenance.

I live pretty close to the border but wouldn't dream of living even a few feet on the other side of it and this debate is part of the reason why. Too many people think that because no one step is a perfect solution to gun violence/gun crime that no solution should be implimented at all. You're letting perfection be the enemy of good enough and claiming that culturally this shift can't happen while doing nothing actively to change that culture. That mentally is literally a sickness and one you all seem blind to.

[Zaune]

More information on the perpetrator

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 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.

Katz opened fire Sunday at a gaming bar inside a collection of restaurants and shops in Jacksonville. He killed two people and wounded 10 others before fatally shooting himself during the "Madden NFL 19" tournament, authorities said.

Jacksonville Sheriff Mike Williams has declined to comment on the gunman's motive.

The suspect's father, Richard Katz of Baltimore, and his mother, Elizabeth Katz of Columbia, Maryland, did not respond to phone messages Sunday or Monday. Efforts by the AP to reach them at their homes were also unsuccessful.

The Howard County, Maryland, divorce filings say that David Katz played video games obsessively as a young adolescent, often refusing to go to school or to bathe. Elizabeth Katz, a toxicologist at the Department of Agriculture, said she confiscated some of her son's gaming equipment after finding him playing 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 in the court files.

At one point, she 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 nearby Sheppard Pratt mental health system 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, said 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.

Federal law requires gun buyers to disclose whether they have ever been involuntarily committed to a mental institution. Maryland state law also prohibits the sale or transfer of a gun to someone who has been diagnosed with a mental disorder or who has a history of violent behavior.

In recent weeks, Katz legally purchased the two handguns he carried from a gun store in Baltimore, the sheriff said.

The sheriff, who said Katz did not fire both weapons, did not say whether Katz disclosed his past hospitalizations on the form for the required federal background check.

By the time Katz was 15, the divorce records show, the father asserted that Elizabeth Katz "routinely" called the police for "trivial matters." In a transcript of a 2010 phone call, the mother phoned a 911 dispatcher, accusing David of "abusing" her by coming home late after a visitation with his father. She then insisted he was "assaulting" her by trying to gain control of the cable cord to the television. She complained to the dispatcher that he was rolling his eyes and laughing.

"You'll roll your eyes. Fine. You'll pay. Where are you going to be tomorrow?" she said in the transcript, addressing her son. The dispatcher encouraged her not to say anything further until a police officer arrived. He was eventually sent to a wilderness therapy program in Utah called RedCliff Ascent for nearly 100 days.

According to the father's version of events, the relationship between mother and son got increasingly worse.

Elizabeth Katz put David's clothes in suitcases on at least two occasions and asked him to leave, including once on Mother's Day in 2007. In court filings, the father asserted that David "routinely expresses his anger" toward her. He claimed that when David was staying with him, the boy showed no signs of behavioral problems and was "generally lively, communicative" and "playful."

In a 2010 letter, David Katz wrote a letter to a magistrate judge saying he wanted to live with his father and describing his mother as "pretty crazy." He said she called the police to the family's home about 20 times and "gets drunk." He blamed her for his poor grades.

Despite the problems, Katz graduated from Hammond High School in Columbia in 2011. He went on to attend the University of Maryland, though he did not earn a degree.

Katz used the gamer tags "Bread" or "Sliced Bread" when competing. The game's maker, EA Sports, lists a David Katz as a 2017 championship winner.

On the Madden competition circuit, Katz was known to barely speak to fellow gamers and sometimes exhibited an erratic playing style, according to other competitors.

"We've always known he was a little off and stuff just because he wasn't social at all," Shay Kivlen, 21, of Seattle, said Monday in an interview.

___

Biesecker reported from Washington. Associated Press Writer Russ Bynum in Jacksonville, Florida, also contributed to this report.

It doesn't excuse or justify his actions, but fucking hell, no wonder the poor twisted little sod went over the edge.

[MKSheppard]

not going directly to or from a range

That's actually in our gun laws in MD. You can't transport a pistol other than in a very few specific cases.

[LadyTevar]

Cut the crap guys. He got the Gun. He killed people because he was a sore loser with mental issues.

What about the victims?
Elijah Clayton
Black male, 22 years old
Woodland Hills, CA

Elijah was a 'career gamer', and had made himself a living out of the Madden Game Tourneys.

In a video that was livestreamed by the network Twitch, Clayton can be seen playing with a smile on his face. A red laser dot appears on Clayton’s sweater. He scores a touchdown. Then the video feed switches to a kickoff return — and 11 gunshots can be heard.

Taylor Robertson
White male, 28 years old
Giles, West Virginia

Taylor left a wife and son behind. He was an accountant who just happened to enjoy Madden games, and was pretty good at them. What did he do to deserve being shot?