Senator to renew gun control push after California shooting spree WASHINGTON Sun May 25, 2014 1:34pm EDT (Reuters) - Senator Richard Blumenthal said on Sunday he wanted to revive gun control legislation rejected by Congress in the wake of the 2012 Newtown, Connecticut, school massacre, saying it could have helped prevent this weekend's deadly California shooting spree. Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut, said on CBS's "Face the Nation" program the legislation, which failed last year, could be revised to emphasize the mental condition of potential gun buyers. "Obviously, not every kind of gun violence is going to be prevented by laws out of Washington," he said. "But at least we can make a start and I am going to urge that we bring back those bills, maybe reconfigure them, center on mental health, which is a point where we can agree that we need more resources to make the country healthier and to make sure that these kinds of horrific, insane, mad occurrences are stopped. "And the Congress will be complicit if we fail in that," he said. On Friday night a 22-year-old college student identified as Elliot Rodger allegedly stabbed three people to death in his apartment in Santa Barbara, California, and then drove through the city and fatally shot three others with handguns he had legally bought. He later killed himself. A YouTube video and a lengthy "manifesto" Rodger left behind were filled with rage and plans for "slaughtering" women because he felt they had rejected him. Rodger had been visited by Santa Barbara authorities last month after a family member expressed concerns about him. Santa Barbara Sheriff Bill Brown said Rodger was courteous to the deputies and did not meet the criteria for legal intervention. U.S. President Barack Obama made gun control a priority shortly after Adam Lanza, 20, killed 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown with an assault-style rifle and two handguns in December 2012. The Newtown massacre, coming on top of other mass shootings, set off an intense national debate about gun violence. But a few months later the Senate defeated Obama's proposals to restrict sales of certain types of guns and require greater background checks. Gun-rights groups, a powerful national political force, opposed the measures, saying they would infringe on Americans' constitutional rights. Blumenthal said the defeated legislation could have given authorities in Santa Barbara a better chance to intervene in Rodger's case before the killings and would provide for "professionals trained in diagnosing and detecting this kind of derangement." The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence ranks California as the state with the strongest gun control measures, requiring background checks for all firearms sales, regardless of the type of gun or where it was purchased. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/25/us-usa-shooting-california-guns-idUSBREA4O09R20140525
You can count on libturds shamelessly exploiting this guy to the max... but only to restrict guns. Not knives that he killed three with and not cars that he ran down others with. Father blames government 'idiots' as California town mourns killings http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/26/us-usa-shooting-california-idUSBREA4N05120140526
Has anyone considered that maybe it's time to start putting mentally troubled people back in institutions? Seriously. Half or more of the prison population in some states are individuals with serious mental issues. Perhaps the shrinks who put young kids on psychotropic meds should re-evaluate their criteria as well. I'll be curious to see if this kid was on them. This kid would have still killed guns or not. Fuck these asshole opportunist politicians. I actually thought Schumer would be the first to call for it, though.
Blumenthal did because he's a Sandy Hook "veteran," the same POS who lied about serving in Vietnam, was busted for it, and still elected by the sheeple in CT. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/nyregion/18blumenthal.html?_r=0
If we have a system that can't stop a guy like this, then we can't stop anyone. All the signs and signals were there to see. Clearly mentally ill. Makes a video threatening to go on a killing spree. Parents notify police. Police go to see him. What else does it take? I listened to the sheriff being interviewed and he said there's a "fine line" when making a determination as to whether or not someone should be apprehended under these conditions. Really? Seems like the line was pretty clear to me. Does the person have to be covered in his own feces while howling at the moon? This kid needed to be taken into custody and put under observation for at least 30 days, maybe more. The video was enough to justify that. All it took was a little common sense, but common sense is in short order these days. The leftist PC police have seen to that. God forbid we offend someone. Profile someone. Stigmatize someone. The tyranny of the few has caused another mass killing. The left will say we need to disarm everyone. The right will say we need to arm everyone. Both are wrong. All we need is a little common sense, and be more concerned with the rights of the potential victim rather than the rights of the obvious criminal.
Too bad he wasn't a second grader who nibbled a pop tart into the shape of a gun. Then they might have taken him seriously! Top School Official Denies Appeal To Have Pop-Tart Gun Suspension Removed From Josh Welch's Record http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/11/pop-tart-gun_n_3419815.html
Yes but nobody with common sense becomes a politician these days. Unfortunately liberals would rather use the victims as props to blame guns and enact more less-than-useless laws.