HorseSoldier said:
He was recently back from a deployment, if I recall correctly, which raises the possibility of PTSD.
For all you know that soldier found out his 8 month old daughter was the result of an affair his wife had while he was deployed for most of the last year, and he flipped out and it had nothing to do with his deployment. He may have been perfectly fine and thrilled going home, with no illness to find.
He was only 21, his wife 19, young hormones, emotions.
What people are suggesting highlighting such things is trying to search people for thought crimes, find pre-crimes and prohibit guaranteed rights to prevent them. Searching individuals for any sign of possible stress or difficulty in order to disarm them. Disarm thousands of returning vets because a small umber of them might have done something and were theoretically prevented.
In a nation where you are supposed to let guilty men go free rather than unjustly convict an innocent man in our legal system, doing the reverse for gun rights with arbitrary diagnosis to maybe prevent something seems contradictory.
On top of that this is a strong healthy young man working as Military Police, and a comparatively weak young 19 year old girl that just had a baby. I doubt he would have had any trouble killing her with any number of regular everyday objects if not his bare hands.
Almost every home I have been in has large kitchen knives, innumerable blunt objects, etc Are you going to remove their ability to cut food, or keep tools?
A strong man could pick up many pieces of furniture and cause lethal injuries with them, maybe no furniture as well?
Flammable liquids have been used in some horrendous attacks, perhaps they shouldn't be able to buy fuel for their vehicle either. Of course they shouldn't be able to drive either.
Potentially strangling her with rope, cords, or even a piece of clothing means the family needs to live naked and without electrical items.
An 8 month old baby is a sitting duck and a gun certainly was not necessary.
The reason a firearm is often chosen when available is because it is the item people in society associate with killing other people. So someone making such a decision is more apt to grab a gun. But no gun available does not protect women and children from stronger men, especially those they live with.
You cannot protect women and young children from the men they are living with by removing firearms.