Shooting rampage at my alma mater, UCSB. 7 dead. Horrifying.

<p>Btw - It’s a pretty safe bet after their investigation of themselves they will be making some sort of changes. They almost have to at this point even if they did everything right. And, there’s a Sheriff’s election in there as well, which is not insignificant. </p>

<p>I would think officers’ discretion at least might now lead them to check the gun registry. and maybe to watch the video… 20 20 hindsight, but it could help in the future.</p>

<p>I think if it was done in the ten minutes they were talking so they could gauge his reaction to the information when they spring it on him it would be more helpful than after when they would have to reach a threshold to go out again. But I don’t know if it is practical or not.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Maybe that is another aspect.
Maybe they get a lot of calls from worried parents and they usually find some kid who went out for a couple days with friends and never returned texts, or were badly hung over, or forgot to pay the phone bill so they never got the calls, and so on.
They show up, see a “normal” kid who is a bit shy but well dressed, clean shaven and otherwise okay, they see a room that is reasonably well kept, and so on.
Maybe they get 10 calls like this a week in a college town, maybe 1, I don’t know
(although someone posted earlier that this was the majority of calls that a cop got).</p>

<p>BTW 10 minutes is a long time to be talking to a policeman at your home and hold it together.</p>

<p>They didn’t go into the room. That according to him would have been the end of it. The manifesto says he turned it into a torture chamber. But, he wasn’t going to let them in, either. And, they didn’t have probable cause. Maybe, they should have asked. Or maybe, he would have gone in first got his gun and come out shooting. We just don’t know. </p>

<p>But, yes, I do think the purpose of the call determines their mindset going it. How could it not?</p>

<p>

at least they would have had guns to shoot back. </p>

<p>But I don’t know what the answer is, I don’t know enough about the process. I just thought this was a possible way.</p>

<p>I find the last lines of this article quite disheartening. This is the generation that grew up hearing “see something, say something” but they are not inclined to do so. </p>

<p><a href=“Elliot O. Rodger’s Killings in California Followed Years of Withdrawal - The New York Times”>Elliot O. Rodger’s Killings in California Followed Years of Withdrawal - The New York Times;

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s a lot of data to sift through even assuming you have a cop or few who are dedicated to examining and evaluating all that data in a stationhouse with reasonable bandwidth from their internet access.</p>

<p>If we’re talking doing so while enroute in a police car, I refer to my previous post where there may be following issues:</p>

<p>Lack of sufficient bandwidth within car due to budget/technology staffing shortfalls.</p>

<p>Lack of sufficient bandwidth on public wi-fi networks & lack of security. The latter aspect is so serious many institutions strongly discourage or even bar their employees from using institution computer equipment to connect on public wi-fi unless they’ve set up a secure VPN tunnel, something which requires reasonable technical staffing and will add to bandwidth overhead on networks which already tend to have low bandwidth…especially if many users are using that particular public wi-fi network. </p>

<p>Usage of cellular networks to view data…especially bandwidth hogging videos can really add up* with serious negative impacts on police budgets due to going over monthly data caps and/or having to subscribe to an expensive plan. Especially if we’re talking a fleet of police cars. Also, during peak usage in some areas, the level of available bandwidth for viewing data/videos will suffer correspondingly. </p>

<p>Also, one I forgot to mention is bandwidth constraints due to environmental interference from radio signals and electromagnetic interference on similar/same frequencies in a given area. </p>

<ul>
<li>Had a colleague who was shocked at how quickly he exceeded his monthly data limit from his cellular provider when he had no internet for a week while moving and scheduling setup of his internet connection in a new apartment. 1 week’s worth of watching youtube videos and a couple of netflix movies streaming at 720p during late evenings was more than enough to do it.<br></li>
</ul>

<p>It’s not a lot of data. Should be pretty easy to put in the person’s name and peruse what surfaces. If some colleges or employers do a quick look-see of applicants, the police can do the same, and probably with access to more info than colleges or employers have. And accessing hotspots is easy. The bandwidth issue is a red herring . An officer can do it from the station and forward the pertinent info if necessary. It’s not that complicated. </p>

<p>I have unlimited data on my phone. Surely the police could do the same. </p>

<p>As an aside, the police will hopefully not be streaming netflix movies while on the job. </p>

<p>After giving this much thought, I do blame the parents for not keeping a closer eye on ER’s spending habits. When our son was in college we did give him a credit card so he could buy food and gas and personal incidentals, but we closely monitored his spending. There is no way he could have gotten away with buying alcohol much less guns. We never would have given him cash. I’m not saying ER’s parents gave him cash, but I’m still having a hard time figuring out how was able to purchase a gun…several guns.</p>

<p>I’m still not blaming the parents but clearly some mistakes were made.</p>

<p>Perhaps he went to the supermarket, bought something small, and got cash back.</p>

<p>Hmm…I’ve never done that. How does it show up on the credit card statement…as a purchase?</p>

<p>Not sure. But if he did it in small amounts over time, it might not raise a red flag. </p>

<p>And if he was 22, while they might disapprove of his drinking, they might have been supportive if he tried to socialize at a bar. Just conjecturing…</p>

<p>I understand not wanting to blame the parents and frankly, don’t. However, at a certain point it begins to sound like making excuses . Cash back shows up as cash back on my accounts.</p>

<p>As they say, nobody’s blameless. </p>

<p>DId your son have an ATM or debit card, rubrownmom?</p>

<p>My son had an American Express credit card. They are terrific at identifying the vendor. </p>

<p>And if a place didn’t take Amex, or wouldn’t allow it on small purchases? Did he have no cash at all? Did he use public transportation? Do they have some sort of transcard?</p>

<p>He had zero cash…he never asked for it, so I guess he didn’t have a problem. The charges were typically between $4.00 and $10.00. The last three years he lived in an apartment or in a fraternity, so rather than a meal plan he bought his meals at the student center or around town.</p>

<p>I don’t use cash either. Everything goes on my credit card. To be honest I have encountered some pizza places etc that do have a minimum $ amount if you want to use a credit card. I think on campus this policy is more relaxed.</p>

<p>He did not use public transportation. He used his own car or the campus bus (free) or on weekends commuted home with his dad.</p>

<p>Honestly, he didn’t have cash, not even because I thought he would buy a gun, but because I was afraid he would lose it.</p>

<p>The cops must have thought something was particularly strange – the reports say a half-dozen showed up at his place to check on him. That’s weird right there.</p>

<p>Experience in my extended family – mental health professionals in a psych unit elected to rely on what the patient told them rather than doing even a cursory check of social media, which would have been illuminating. They didn’t check with family members since she hadn’t given permission. They weren’t even aware of the proximate cause that had triggered the initial police response: that the patient had been giving away all her belongings to random people she saw in stores. Once the ER doc decided to admit her, the psych unit based their treatment and custodial conditions on their interviews with her and their observations at that time. Nothing else seemed to matter until the point when the patient committed suicide on their unit. </p>

<p>Why would we expect that the police would somehow behave in a more comprehensive fashion than mental health professionals? </p>