I haven’t posted here in quite some time, but yesterday an event occurred which I thought should be shared with other caregivers.
An active shooter situation occurred about a mile from me in public housing for the elderly. Apparently it was some type of assisted living.
The apartment building was partially (apparently) evacuated. Residents were kept together on the street; many were in wheelchairs.
It seems the police of the city as well as surrounding neighborhoods managed to evacuate those people before any harm came to them.
The 70 year old shooter was found dead early this morning. Cause of death is unclear at this point.
My concern and reason for posting is that if any of you have family or friends in assisted living, especially public housing, ask the administration what the gun policy is, and be diligent to ensure that your relatives or friends are not in a situation in which an active shooter can endanger their lives.
Please share this with your friends.
If it wasn't guns it would be something, as Smeshque said, it's a matter of the heart if someone is set on killing.
It is not a matter of gun control, it is a matter of the heart.
Evil is a matter of the heart. If you remove guns, then you will have to remove knives, Spoons, Forks, Pillows, Rope, Cars and so on... It would never end
Gun control does not change a persons heart and will to kill.
Trust me if you are ever saved by a citizen exercising their Right to Bear arms, you will be thankful they had a gun.
As said before Gun control, only arms criminals and makes everyone else vulnerable.
It is common sense, something that has been forgotten to be exercised.
But I believe that if you take guns away from law abiding citizens then only the criminals will be armed and then we will all be living in constant fear.
I agree with Rovana's post. Armed civilians are not the answer unless said civilians have had extensive training. I am an excellent shot, but would be useless in an active shooter situation with all of the commotion.
Anyone remember a few months ago a young man [armed civilian] at a mall was killed when the police thought he was the active shooter?
Right now the best approach is to have metal detectors in all buildings. At least that would the first speed bump for anyone carrying a firearm wishing to do harm.
I agree with you Worried. We would have a lot more victims if it wasn't for armed civilians. The criminals don't care about the laws or the "gun free zone."
BTW, I do prefer the OK corral (where both sides were armed and had survivors) to the numerous executions of disarmed senior citizens performed by Russians, Chinese, Germans and some others during WWII. Ensuring senior and/or public housing residents have no opportunity to defend themselves only makes them defenseless targets (a.k.a. sitting ducks) available for an easy massacre at some lunatic's whim.
I thought the constitution refers to the right of the people to bear arms in reference to the state's right for a well regulated militia. I don't remember it saying that we have the right to turn senior housing into the OK corral
law abiding citizens will follow the rules and the law. If make everything a “gun free zone” more lives will be lost because there won’t be armed citizens to help stop the threat.
The sugarland springs mass shooter was killed by armed civilian. More lives would have lost had that civilian been unarmed. Just saying.
Sadly, my state, NC, had a terrible tragedy a few years ago when a nursing home employee's ex-husband showed up and went ballistic. It was horrible. The wife survived by hiding in a locked room though. Some of the residents weren't so lucky.
And if - first guess - this was a euthanasia-related killing/suicide, better a gun than a brick or a pillow or bleach.
But a) - it's lovely to hear from you! and b) being from a namby-pamby country that allows firearms only to drug dealers and teenage gangs, I must admit I am occasionally grateful that hiding ammunition from demented seniors with hunting rifles isn't a common problem for us.
Forgive me, but I have also have a bone to pick with this one. Your post implies (at least to me) that senior living and/or public housing should be a gun free zone to reduce active shooter risks. Sorry, but that just hits a couple of my buttons around people wanting to eliminate the constitutional rights of others - in this case - either seniors or poor folk needing public housing or both. As a independent libertarian, I do not support "automatically" making anyone a second class citizen.
Just remember (1) aging does not automatically remove any of civil rights: free speech, intrusive searches, religious freedom or even self-defense; (2) all available law enforcement statistics demonstrate that gun free zones (where only criminals are armed) attract active shooters. In fact, if the "shooter" was the only "victim" then this incident doesn't qualify as an "active shooter" by the legal law enforcement definition.
While I worked to get my father's concealed carry permit pulled (as well as his drivers' license) after his dementia diagnosis, I do not support efforts to remove constitutional guaranteed rights from seniors or anyone else without due process. If the person has a mental impairment (physical or emotional) that makes them a danger to others, then use the due process methods enshrined in state law to limit those rights. When we start trying to rescind rights from "everyone" who ever had a anti-depressant medication, had a traumatic brain injury, or lived in public housing whether or not they have personally exhibited any aggressive behavior towards others, that's just unconstitutional. The compulsive mental hospital standard works because in order to involuntarily commit anyone, there must be a court hearing where a judge is presented evidence that a particular person is impaired. Protective orders require convincing a judge a particular person is a threat to someone.
As far as public housing goes, anyone convicted of a felony or under an order of protection cannot have a firearm; the law abiding citizens living in public housing deserve the same opportunity to defend themselves against the criminals as those who can afford to live outside of public housing. While an AL/MC/NH which accepts residents with impaired functioning and should rightly restrict access (by contract) to many items that are potentially dangerous (stoves, coffee pots, fireworks, knives, firearms, etc.), those facilities also must accept the responsibility to provide security and "protect" their residents. Evacuating residents to congregate in a nearby street actually makes them easier targets for an actual active shooter, particularly if the housing building was a multi-story apartment like structure.
In closing, I would just like to point out that anyone living in the United States is still 4 times more likely to be struck by lighting than being injured or killed by an active shooter, although the risk is considerably higher in states that do not support open or concealed carry. In facilities for our elderly, carbon monoxide poisoning from natural gas/propane venting failures are a much more likely cause of traumatic death, as are fires. When was the last time someone asked about the smoke or carbon monoxide detectors in your LO's facility?
I'm not saying I want to kill my dad, but I am saying some of the residents there are miserable and some have been there as long as a decade. I visited yesterday for a while and the same woman is sitting in the dining room, shaking and crying out for help, just like she has for 2+ years.
So good to see you again!
And thank you for that valuable information.
And also, you’ve been missed, especially on your gardening thread!