Rep. Gifford shooting: The Shooter

[Liddle Noodnik]

I thought about putting this on Allnurses Central and maybe a mod will end up moving it - but I am really bothered, and it has a lot to do with my disability (bipolar). Has to do with my functioning as a nurse. Also has to do with our patients, what if we have to take care of someone who has shot and killed other people? (I'm sure many of you have had to deal w/ it).

Funny, just last nite saw Grey's Anatomy in which they had to operate on a shooter in a mass casualty situation.

ANYway - here is my rant, do with it as you will, I just cut-and-pasted it from my almost-post on Central:

**********

Here is a rant, skip it if you are sick of hearing about other people's problems (lol)

REALLY upset about this shooting, but not for the reasons you might think. A friend mentioned we need to pray for the shooter's family as well as for those in the crossfire. Didn't occur to me, and she was right.

Later, I realized we ought to pray for the shooter himself.

GAH -= I hate that people are going to pick apart his "being disturbed" as they call it. It's obvious apparently, from his FB and myspace accounts, that it has been festering for a long time...

So, of COURSE mental illness a major cause. I can't imagine a scenario where anyone who shoots a human being (other than self-defense) could possibly be sane.

But I can't help but think about a few members of my family, and I myself, who suffer from mental illness, and but for the grace of God it could have been one of us with that gun - (shaking my head). And now sitting in a jail cell wondering what on earth happened ... or even - feeling justified? He might be...

I imagine his family is wondering "what if" and "what could they have done to help him before he got to this point..."

I don't know why I "went there" but I don't like it. Just feeling really sad and disgusted.

It really makes me mad the cost of mental illness on the fabric of our society, emotionally, financially, etc.

And, selfishly I know, hating that I have to deal with my own. Like, dealing with meds and dr's appts, plus all the worry about 2 siblings and my own son - who don't really take care of their illness. And, if you recall, I went a couple years thinking it was wise not to be on meds myself. Found out I was risking myself and my patients' safety, because I did relapse with my hypomania. That ALSO makes me mad, in hindsight. I could have hurt someone, or myself, on the job, driving, who knows?

Which goes to show you, the person with mental illness doesn't always judge their problem correctly!!! Feeling a little guilt there. At times have felt VERY guilty.

Of course, the meds aren't always right, so it isn't always the patient. And, sometimes side effects can make a person screwy.

So, forgive me for ranting a little bit - I am just really sad for the whole situation. Of course I am upset for the people who were shot and their loved ones.

There is also the obvious thought, that life is short and we never know when someone we love can be taken away from us - reminds us to make peace with each other and with God.

Sighhhh-

[Liddle Noodnik]

nope. dead serious. seen a few similar cases from close up, and discussed the clinical opinion of the defendendants with the court appointed psychiatrist. this guy was way too organised to be mentally incapacitated. he is classic anti-social personality from what i have read of his profile. he just has a really nasty personality, and needs to be put away for multiple life terms.

Can you clarify? When you say "anti-social personality" do you mean a personality disorder? which would then fall under "insanity"? Or ...

So confusing.

[Jules A, MSN]

nope. dead serious. seen a few similar cases from close up, and discussed the clinical opinion of the defendendants with the court appointed psychiatrist. this guy was way too organised to be mentally incapacitated. he is classic anti-social personality from what i have read of his profile. he just has a really nasty personality, and needs to be put away for multiple life terms.

You are definitely entitled to your opinion but as nurses it isn't within our scope to diagnose and speculating about something that none of us have complete information on is kind of pointless, imo. I'm a total hard ass when it comes to never letting criminals back out on the street to prey on society regardless of their mental status if they are a danger but I also believe there are many that truly were not able to control themselves because of their mental status.

[elkpark]

Can you clarify? When you say "anti-social personality" do you mean a personality disorder? which would then fall under "insanity"? Or ...

So confusing.

(Again, "insane" and "insanity" have specific legal meaning, and are not simply synonyms for "mental illness." Most people with a personality disorder, even a severe personality disorder, would not meet the legal standard of "insane." Most people with any kind of mental illness don't meet the legal definition of "insane.")

[Popwhizbangz, LPN]

What strikes me in this case, among other things, is that we always hear actual and speculative reports of mental illness in such cases, yet the research is quite clear - most violence is committed by people without any psychosis or other major mental illness. I've worked with the most aggressive, psychotic, and/or psychiatrically impaired people in my region for 15 years now, and of hundreds (probably thousands by now), only one has ever to my knowledge killed anyone, ever. Meanwhile we've had a few thousand murders in the same area over that time, but you never hear in the news that a perp had no history of mental illness. The general perception of risk in this area does not match reality, and causes a lot of largely harmless, very ill people harm.

A side note - with all the debate re guns, the shooter in this case was stopped entirely by people not using any guns. It hardly argues that more guns provide more safety or security.

Just a thought.......

[Liddle Noodnik]

What strikes me in this case, among other things, is that we always hear actual and speculative reports of mental illness in such cases, yet the research is quite clear - most violence is committed by people without any psychosis or other major mental illness. I've worked with the most aggressive, psychotic, and/or psychiatrically impaired people in my region for 15 years now, and of hundreds (probably thousands by now), only one has ever to my knowledge killed anyone, ever. Meanwhile we've had a few thousand murders in the same area over that time, but you never hear in the news that a perp had no history of mental illness. The general perception of risk in this area does not match reality, and causes a lot of largely harmless, very ill people harm.

A side note - with all the debate re guns, the shooter in this case was stopped entirely by people not using any guns. It hardly argues that more guns provide more safety or security.

Just a thought.......

Good points!

thank you!

[Jules A, MSN]

What strikes me in this case, among other things, is that we always hear actual and speculative reports of mental illness in such cases, yet the research is quite clear - most violence is committed by people without any psychosis or other major mental illness. I've worked with the most aggressive, psychotic, and/or psychiatrically impaired people in my region for 15 years now, and of hundreds (probably thousands by now), only one has ever to my knowledge killed anyone, ever. Meanwhile we've had a few thousand murders in the same area over that time, but you never hear in the news that a perp had no history of mental illness. The general perception of risk in this area does not match reality, and causes a lot of largely harmless, very ill people harm.

A side note - with all the debate re guns, the shooter in this case was stopped entirely by people not using any guns. It hardly argues that more guns provide more safety or security.

Just a thought.......

Interesting because I've cared for at least 15 patients with mental illness just in this past year who have committed murder and many, many more with assault charges. It is definitely not the majority of people with mental illness I'm not saying that but really how stable could we consider someone who did something this horrific?

[Popwhizbangz, LPN]

Personally I'm less in the specific cases than the general trends - I have no influence over the outcome of such cases, and I lack enough information to do anything but guess endlessly, not my cup of tea. That said, my instinct in this case leans to permanent removal from society - the strongest known predictor of future violence, as far as I know, is past history.

I'm more focused on the impact on public perceptions and public policy. When I discuss mental illness and crime, I'm mostly focused on the overall patterns, the odds of something similar happening in the future, and how best to change those odds favorably. The odds of this one case happening are, of course, 100% because we know it already happened. If we let one dramatic example inaccurately skew our perception of the odds or predictability of violence in other cases, we do everyone a disservice. The fact is, for the most part, except for people who have already proven violent, no one has been able to predict very well at all who will become so violent, or when. The one thing we can predict with fair accuracy is the how - people kill or suicide, intentionally or accidentally, with guns, cars, bridges, etc. Public health efforts to make such means less available have been far away the most successful in preventing deaths.

If interested, look up a recent review article in the New York Times, focused on suicide prevention - it gives three examples where many thousands of deaths were prevented cheaply and easily. It stands to reason that similar efforts, if/when politically and practically feasible, would greatly reduce murder rates, much more effectively than our efforts to find and address individual perps. It seems that such efforts have little chance of success with guns, of course, given our culture and politics. The idea that more guns means more safety baffles me - I can see the argument, but everywhere you look, the more guns there are, the more deaths, both by murder and suicide.

[justashooter]

(Again, "insane" and "insanity" have specific legal meaning, and are not simply synonyms for "mental illness." Most people with a personality disorder, even a severe personality disorder, would not meet the legal standard of "insane." Most people with any kind of mental illness don't meet the legal definition of "insane.")

thank you for clarifying. this perp has a personality disorder, so under a wider definition he is mentally ill, but under the narrow definition of the law, and under the broader definition of responsibility-bearing, he is not insane or free from responsibility, by any means. it is time for us to stop coddling people with toxic personalities and to address the social issues that create them. there are enough genuinely mentally ill people out there already.

[justashooter]

The one thing we can predict with fair accuracy is the how - people kill or suicide, intentionally or accidentally, with guns, cars, bridges, etc. Public health efforts to make such means less available have been far away the most successful in preventing deaths.

If interested, look up a recent review article in the New York Times...It seems that such efforts have little chance of success with guns, of course, given our culture and politics. The idea that more guns means more safety baffles me - I can see the argument, but everywhere you look, the more guns there are, the more deaths, both by murder and suicide.

yeah, let's reduce the number of bridges and cars to reduce suicide. perhaps we should also reduce the number of cats to reduce knitting, as old ladies that knit frequently have lots of cats.

[justashooter]

a side note - with all the debate re guns, the shooter in this case was stopped entirely by people not using any guns. it hardly argues that more guns provide more safety or security.

just a thought.......

the shooter in this case was disarmed by two men, one of which had some training in firearms use. within moments of their action a person who was lawfully carrying a concealed firearm did respond from nearby. unfortunately, he was not close enough to act when the shooting began, or the death toll would have been lower. he did act appropriately when he came into contact by identifying the criminal shooter and stabilising the situation. in many cases such people have responded to "active shooter" situations and quelled the violence. if more people lawfully carried the chance that someone lawfully carrying would have been close enough to act in a timely manner would be increased.

what the responding gun owner has to say:

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/154189

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/arizona-hero-tells-ed-schultz-tougher-gun-laws-wont-help-theres-no-shortage-of-firearms/

just a few examples of cases in which armed citizens responded to criminal shootings effectively:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/pearl_high_school_shooting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/appalachian_school_of_law_shooting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/new_life_church_shooting#new_life_church_shooting

http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2007/05/2_bank_workers_killed_in_robbe.html

[morte, LPN, LVN]

the shooter in this case was disarmed by two men, one of which had some training in firearms use. within moments of their action a person who was lawfully carrying a concealed firearm did respond from nearby. unfortunately, he was not close enough to act when the shooting began, or the death toll would have been lower. he did act appropriately when he came into contact by identifying the criminal shooter and stabilising the situation. in many cases such people have responded to "active shooter" situations and quelled the violence. if more people lawfully carried the chance that someone lawfully carrying would have been close enough to act in a timely manner would be increased.

what the responding gun owner has to say:

http://www.dailypaul.com/node/154189

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/arizona-hero-tells-ed-schultz-tougher-gun-laws-wont-help-theres-no-shortage-of-firearms/

just a few examples of cases in which armed citizens responded to criminal shootings effectively:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/pearl_high_school_shooting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/appalachian_school_of_law_shooting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/new_life_church_shooting#new_life_church_shooting

http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2007/05/2_bank_workers_killed_in_robbe.html

i was under the impression that it was a woman who first got to him.....

[justashooter]

I was under the impression that it was a woman who first got to him.....

that's media spin. it's kinda like giving a silver star to a girl who's convoy gets ambushed, fails to get off a shot, breaks her leg, gets captured, and later rescued. the guy who was in her convoy that managed to kill several enemy troops, got off his entire load-out of 200 rounds, and some of another guy's? he got a bronze star.

why tell the truth about a situation when you can spin it?