ChasingBlueSky 0 #1 April 9, 2009 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30109090/ Partial Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-kN39AlR-c QuoteCASSELBERRY, Fla. - A central Florida woman who fatally shot her son then killed herself at a shooting range wrote in suicide notes to her boyfriend that she was trying to save her son. "I'm so sorry," Marie Moore wrote several times. "I had to send my son to heaven and myself to Hell." QuoteMitchell's father, Charles Moore, told police that Marie Moore had a history of mental illness and had previously attempted suicide and been involuntarily committed to a mental hospital in 2002 under the state's Baker Act. Quote"I'm sorry to do this in your place of business, but I had to save my son," one message said. "God made me a queen and I failed. I'm a fallen angel. He turned me into the anti-Christ." Moore said she could have killed only herself but felt she had to "save" her son and do it in a public way so the world could also be saved. "Hopefully when I die, there will 1,000 years of peace." _________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piper17 1 #2 April 9, 2009 How did a former mental patient (involuntary commitment) come into possession of any firearm. That is a disqualifying factor to purchasing a firearm in Connecticut and, I thought, all states. Is this not the case in Florida as well? Or did someone drop the ball and not have this commitment entered into the legal record where it would have been picked up in the FBI background check...as was the case in the VA Tech shooting incident."A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #3 April 9, 2009 QuoteHow did a former mental patient (involuntary commitment) come into possession of any firearm. It was a rental gun. Lots of ranges rent guns without background checks, because they are in the supposedly controlled conditions of the range. In this case, it looks to me like the range operators are at fault.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 200 #4 April 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteHow did a former mental patient (involuntary commitment) come into possession of any firearm. It was a rental gun. Lots of ranges rent guns without background checks, because they are in the supposedly controlled conditions of the range. In this case, it looks to me like the range operators are at fault. Sorry, the mother's at fault not the gun range.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryzflies 0 #5 April 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteHow did a former mental patient (involuntary commitment) come into possession of any firearm. It was a rental gun. Lots of ranges rent guns without background checks, because they are in the supposedly controlled conditions of the range. In this case, it looks to me like the range operators are at fault. Sorry, the mother's at fault not the gun range. Renting guns to nutcases is OK then? How about felons?If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #6 April 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteHow did a former mental patient (involuntary commitment) come into possession of any firearm. It was a rental gun. Lots of ranges rent guns without background checks, because they are in the supposedly controlled conditions of the range. In this case, it looks to me like the range operators are at fault. Sorry, the mother's at fault not the gun range. +1Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #7 April 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteHow did a former mental patient (involuntary commitment) come into possession of any firearm. It was a rental gun. Lots of ranges rent guns without background checks, because they are in the supposedly controlled conditions of the range. In this case, it looks to me like the range operators are at fault. Sorry, the mother's at fault not the gun range. Renting guns to nutcases is OK then? How about felons? Ah, I just knew you'd be in with your usual strawman... why don't you show us what laws concern gun ranges and rental guns?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryzflies 0 #8 April 9, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote How did a former mental patient (involuntary commitment) come into possession of any firearm. It was a rental gun. Lots of ranges rent guns without background checks, because they are in the supposedly controlled conditions of the range. In this case, it looks to me like the range operators are at fault. Sorry, the mother's at fault not the gun range. Renting guns to nutcases is OK then? How about felons? Ah, I just knew you'd be in with your usual strawman... why don't you show us what laws concern gun ranges and rental guns? I didn't ask if it was legal, I asked if it was OK. If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #9 April 9, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote How did a former mental patient (involuntary commitment) come into possession of any firearm. It was a rental gun. Lots of ranges rent guns without background checks, because they are in the supposedly controlled conditions of the range. In this case, it looks to me like the range operators are at fault. Sorry, the mother's at fault not the gun range. Renting guns to nutcases is OK then? How about felons? Ah, I just knew you'd be in with your usual strawman... why don't you show us what laws concern gun ranges and rental guns? I didn't ask if it was legal, I asked if it was OK. Why didn't you use your telepathy / precognizance and prevent it?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
councilman24 36 #10 April 9, 2009 And how are YOU going to judge 'nut cases'? By the drool running down their chin? This is the risk that a business that chooses to rent guns for use on their range takes. They do not have the ability to judge 'nut cases' and the ability to do background checks for convictions in the 5 minutes of filling out a rental form. We've had people commit suicide by skydive also. Are we supposed to judge the nutcases also? I would choose not to rent firearms if I had such an establishment. Or not because it is a valuable tool to be able to test drive before purchase. The one gun store with an range inside that does this has had as suicide there also. A little easier and cheaper than buying a gun FTF to use.I'm old for my age. Terry Urban D-8631 FAA DPRE Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #11 April 9, 2009 Ain't PMT a bitch? (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FreeflyChile 0 #12 April 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteHow did a former mental patient (involuntary commitment) come into possession of any firearm. It was a rental gun. Lots of ranges rent guns without background checks, because they are in the supposedly controlled conditions of the range. In this case, it looks to me like the range operators are at fault. Sorry, the mother's at fault not the gun range. +1 I understand the thought process that the mother's at fault as she's the one that planned this out and then went through with it, but can you please explain to me how you think the gun range is completely absolved from all responsibility/fault here (if that is your position on this...if I misunderstood, my bad)? To use the skydiving example, I'd say this is like renting gear to someone that says they're a skydiver without checking a logbook and then saying the DZ is not responsible when that person goes in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penniless 0 #13 April 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteHow did a former mental patient (involuntary commitment) come into possession of any firearm. It was a rental gun. Lots of ranges rent guns without background checks, because they are in the supposedly controlled conditions of the range. In this case, it looks to me like the range operators are at fault. Sorry, the mother's at fault not the gun range. Renting guns to nutcases is OK then? How about felons? Ah, I just knew you'd be in with your usual strawman... why don't you show us what laws concern gun ranges and rental guns? Since you consider the question a "strawman", either you don't know what a strawman argument is, or you claim he misprepresented your position and you really don't think the range should be renting to nutcases. Which is it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #14 April 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteHow did a former mental patient (involuntary commitment) come into possession of any firearm. It was a rental gun. Lots of ranges rent guns without background checks, because they are in the supposedly controlled conditions of the range. In this case, it looks to me like the range operators are at fault. Sorry, the mother's at fault not the gun range. +1 I understand the thought process that the mother's at fault as she's the one that planned this out and then went through with it, but can you please explain to me how you think the gun range is completely absolved from all responsibility/fault here (if that is your position on this...if I misunderstood, my bad)? To use the skydiving example, I'd say this is like renting gear to someone that says they're a skydiver without checking a logbook and then saying the DZ is not responsible when that person goes in. Nope. Using your analogy, the correct scenario would be a licensed skydiver renting gear and going in on a no-pull.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #15 April 9, 2009 Quote Using your analogy, the correct scenario would be a licensed skydiver renting gear and going in on a no-pull. Is a license required to rent a gun? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #16 April 9, 2009 QuoteQuote Using your analogy, the correct scenario would be a licensed skydiver renting gear and going in on a no-pull. Is a license required to rent a gun? Not that I'm aware of, no. I was trying to find a way to show that there wasn't any need to 'pretend' anything - skydiving was probably a bad analogy anyway, in that respect.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #17 April 9, 2009 QuoteLots of ranges rent guns without background checks, because they are in the supposedly controlled conditions of the range. That doesn't seem like a good idea to me. While I'm not for having a ridiculous amount of gun legislation, I do think that background checks are a good idea for anyone buying or renting a gun. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,473 #18 April 9, 2009 >And how are YOU going to judge 'nut cases'? By the drool running down their chin? Well, having been admitted involuntarily to a mental hospital after trying to kill themselves would be a good clue as to whether or not they are a nut case. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pbwing 0 #19 April 9, 2009 QuoteNope. Using your analogy, the correct scenario would be a licensed skydiver renting gear and going in on a no-pull. I'm not sure I understand. Are you equating the mother in this story to a licensed skydiver? Would her mental history preclude her from owning a gun, therefore I believe that FreeflyChile's analogy is correct... And to his question, what (if any) responsibility do you think the range owner has in this incident? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #20 April 9, 2009 Quote>And how are YOU going to judge 'nut cases'? By the drool running down their chin? Well, having been admitted involuntarily to a mental hospital after trying to kill themselves would be a good clue as to whether or not they are a nut case. Quoteyes but how would a gun range find this out? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,153 #21 April 9, 2009 I thought this wasn't supposed to happen in an area with trained and armed people. Thought this was only supposed to happen in gun-free zones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,473 #22 April 9, 2009 >yes but how would a gun range find this out? Well, having their customers get a license would help. Or some other means; I am open to suggestions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #23 April 9, 2009 QuoteQuoteNope. Using your analogy, the correct scenario would be a licensed skydiver renting gear and going in on a no-pull. I'm not sure I understand. Are you equating the mother in this story to a licensed skydiver? Would her mental history preclude her from owning a gun, therefore I believe that FreeflyChile's analogy is correct... And to his question, what (if any) responsibility do you think the range owner has in this incident? If you have a licensed skydiver (gun range equivalent: 21 or older) that rented equipment and killed themself with it, why would you say the dropzone (range) is at fault, if the person was legal to jump (rent a gun)? That is why I said above that the skydiving analogy was a bad one. While the analogy can be made, it's unclear. Regardless, there is no requirement and no mechanism in place for a gun range to do background checks on potential renters. In fact, it could very well be a HIPAA violation, as it exposes identifiable medical information.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #24 April 9, 2009 QuoteSorry, the mother's at fault not the gun range. I don't think the range gets a free pass here--they definitely bear some responsibility. I'm very pro-2nd Amendment. I own (quite a few) firearms. I believe that if you hand someone a firearm, whether they are paying you to rent it or just borrowing it, you have a duty to evaluate them and decide if you think they ought to have a gun in their hand. In this case, whoever gave her the weapon (i.e. the range, or their employee) did a poor job of this. Am I saying that the range ought to be sued over it? No. Am I saying that someone ought to face charges? No. But I am saying that someone screwed up, and that person (or persons) is going to have to live with the knowledge that they bear some responsibility here.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #25 April 9, 2009 QuoteNope. Using your analogy, the correct scenario would be a licensed skydiver renting gear and going in on a no-pull. I don't think so. This woman wasn't a "licensed skydiver." I've got a local range that only rents guns to CCW holders. If this happened there I'd agree with your analogy.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
