• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Lori Haas lies again, gets caught by Richmond Times Dispatch editors.

riverrat10k

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2008
Messages
1,472
Location
on a rock in the james river
http://www.timesdispatch.com/opinio...cle_5cca12b9-aee4-587d-b357-2882150c55c3.html

"Unfortunately, Baker then dangles the straw man argument that “the numbers appear to contradict a long-running popular narrative that more guns cause more crime.”The problem is that gun violence prevention advocates in Virginia like me have never suggested any such thing. " Untrue, she has.

She herself shifts the arguement made in last weeks article to 'gun deaths" while the article spoke of "gun crime".
The Nov. 24 article blows big holes in the anti's arguement that "more guns equal more crime". As that article stated, gun sales are through the roof, but gun crime is down. So she changes the narrative.

She blames "weak gun laws" on "(throwing) her own daughter into harms way." No mention that on a campus with thousands of people, only a very few LEO's were equipped to stop Cho's threat. No mention that Va. Tech was a "Gun Free Zone". Gee, Lori, how did the crime ever happen? There was a POLICY against it! In fact multiple laws against it!

The RTD gave Lori her space, but also ran an editorial box in the print edition recapping the article from Nov. 24; I believe to show her inconsistencies and false arguements she made about the article.

Question is, why does anyone listen to a person from such a small, radical, minority group?

"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when you might have to back up your actions with your life."

---R. A. Heinlein
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MackTheKnife

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
198
Location
Jacksonville, Florida
Lied about her daughter as well.

Lori Hass says her daughter died due to lax gun laws. Her daughter died because Cho's mental illness was never entered into the official record which would have prevented him from legally buying a gun. She also cites the "reasonable requirement" for proper training. What kind of training? Who would decide at what level- basic, intermediate, or advanced?
 
Last edited:

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Lori Hass says her daughter died due to lax gun laws. Her daughter died because Cho's mental illness was never entered into the official record which would have prevented him from legally buying a gun. She also cites the "reasonable requirement" for proper training. What kind of training? Who would decide at what level- basic, intermediate, or advanced?
Haas' daughter was not killed during the attack, she was injured and survived.

TFred
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,277
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Lori Hass says her daughter died due to lax gun laws. Her daughter died because Cho's mental illness was never entered into the official record which would have prevented him from legally buying a gun.

Please, lets not open that door any further. Those students were killed and injured because a madman wanted to kill.

Psychiatry is notoriously arbitrary; the last thing we want is psych's deciding who can or cannot legally aquire the means to defend himself.
 

moriar

Regular Member
Joined
May 10, 2012
Messages
88
Location
Alexandria, VA
Please, lets not open that door any further. Those students were killed and injured because a madman wanted to kill.

Psychiatry is notoriously arbitrary; the last thing we want is psych's deciding who can or cannot legally aquire the means to defend himself.

Agreed 100%

Pysch : So John Doe, why do you want to purchase a firearm?

John Doe : Well, I would like to purchase one for target plinking and most definitely to protect my house and family.

Pysch : I see you mentioned protecting house and family, do you place priority in your house over your family?

Pysch : John, I am sorry but I will have to deny your right to purchase since you chose to say house and family.
 

MackTheKnife

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
198
Location
Jacksonville, Florida
Re: Lori Hass lies again, gets caught by Richmond Times Dispatch editors.

He was seen by medical professionals and I believe ordered into treatment. By law this should have been reported and would have precluded him buying a gun. It's not psych determining, it's the law determining.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
 

Anonymouse

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2012
Messages
210
Location
Virginia
Re: Lori Hass lies again, gets caught by Richmond Times Dispatch editors.

He was seen by medical professionals and I believe ordered into treatment. By law this should have been reported and would have precluded him buying a gun. It's not psych determining, it's the law determining.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Medical professionals don't and can't report anything unless they believe there is a specific threat. They also don't report people ordered into treatment. There is a medical and legal difference between being ordered to treatment and being involuntarily committed. Following doctor orders is voluntary. Self-commitment is voluntary. Forced commitment is not.

Just having ideations or showing signs is not enough. They have to believe the threat exists and that you will act on it.

Most states have mandatory reporting laws but these tend to cover Domestic Abuse, child abuse, neglect and similar acts.

General violence reporting is to protect the patient only and is like an affirmative defense. The psych must answer for divulging info and the patient's danger level to himself or others can mitigate that act

Example:

Patient X dreaming or having voices tell him to kill everyone is not enough.

Patient X saying he wants to kill everyone could be enough depending on the patient and psych doctor.

Patient X saying he is going to kill everyone is enough.



Tap'n while driving...
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,169
Location
earth's crust
Example:

Patient X dreaming or having voices tell him to kill everyone is not enough.

Patient X saying he wants to kill everyone could be enough depending on the patient and psych doctor.

Patient X saying he is going to kill everyone is enough.



Tap'n while driving...


Person A: "Why did you kill everyone in the house?"
Person B: "Because they were home."
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Do we know her daughter's stance? Seems it can't be the same as Lori's, as we never hear of her.
I have no idea. No easy picks from Google. If I had to guess, I would guess that she just wants to move on with her life and there probably isn't much she can do about her mother taking the spotlight, whether she supports her actions or not.

TFred
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,331
Location
Valhalla
He was seen by medical professionals and I believe ordered into treatment. By law this should have been reported and would have precluded him buying a gun. It's not psych determining, it's the law determining.

How so? Is this your position? It is the anti's erronious argument.

Not relevant. Separate issue entirely.

Refers to what?
 

Tess

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
3,831
Location
Alexandria, Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
Ooo. This is a good question. Why is the actual victim not doing the complaining?


One would hope it's because she doesn't see herself as a "victim" but rather as a person who was caught in a situation from which she learned, which influenced her personality one way or another, and which is a part of life. That's the healthy-mentality progression.
 

MackTheKnife

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
198
Location
Jacksonville, Florida
Let me clarify

How so? Is this your position? It is the anti's erronious argument.

Refers to what?
FROM WIKIPEDIA:
Cho, a senior English major at Virginia Tech, had previously been diagnosed with a severe anxiety disorder. During much of his middle school and high school years, he received therapy and special education support. After graduating from high school, Cho enrolled at Virginia Tech. Because of federal privacy laws, Virginia Tech was unaware of Cho's previous diagnosis or the accommodations he had been granted at school. In 2005, Cho was accused of stalking two female students. After an investigation, a Virginia special justice declared Cho mentally ill and ordered him to attend treatment.[4] Lucinda Roy, a professor and former chairwoman of the English department, had also asked Cho to seek counseling.[5] Cho's mother also turned to her church for help.[6]
The massacre prompted the state of Virginia to close legal loopholes that had previously allowed Cho, an individual adjudicated as mentally unsound, to purchase handguns without detection by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). It also led to passage of the first major federal gun control measure in more than 13 years. The law strengthening the NICS was signed by President George W. Bush on January 5, 2008.[11]

This is what I was referring to about Cho. If he had been "in the system", he wouldn't have been able to legally purchase a gun. If anyone has inferred that I am a proponent of needing a psych eval to purchase a gun, far from it. About the only thing I agree with is the instant background check. Other than that, the 2nd Amendment says it all.
As for the relevant comment, I was referring to the VA situation, which is AFU, wasn't the same thing as the Cho situation. I wholeheartedly and strenuously disagree with the VA being the arbiter of whether or not a veteran can or can't have a gun.
I hope I have cleared up what I was trying to say and apologize for any confusion or offense. None was intended.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Its a lot deeper than that.
The simple fact is the Government can't filter out nuts any more than it can stop NY Construction Workers from making colorful comments to passing women.

There are some things that have to fall back on basics and that means people being responsible for their own safety.

The simple and indisputable fact is...if someone had killed the neurotic little fellow in the beginning, he wouldn't have been a threat any longer.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Its a lot deeper than that.
The simple fact is the Government can't filter out nuts any more than it can stop NY Construction Workers from making colorful comments to passing women.

There are some things that have to fall back on basics and that means people being responsible for their own safety.

The simple and indisputable fact is...if someone had killed the neurotic little fellow in the beginning, he wouldn't have been a threat any longer.
That's too much common sense for the liberal mind to process.

TFred
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,331
Location
Valhalla
There was/is another mother who saw things very differently.

Read about Holly Adams whose daughter, Leslie, was a victim at VT.

"Speaking for myself, I would give anything if someone on campus; a
professor, one of the trained military or guardsman taking classes or
another student could have saved my daughter by shooting Cho before he
killed our loved ones. Because professors, staff and students are
precluded from protecting themselves on campus, Cho, a student at
Virginia Tech himself, was able to simply walk on campus and go on a
killing rampage with no worry that anyone would stop him."

http://www2.vcdl.org/webapps/vcdl/vadetail.html?RECID=6619361
 
Top