On-line Opinion Magazine…OK, it's a blog
Random header image... Refresh for more!

The Aftermath

CNN reports that Arizona shooting survivor in custody after allegedly making threat

(CNN) — A man who was shot but survived last Saturday’s massacre in Tucson, Arizona, was taken to a county mental services unit Saturday after making a threatening comment at a town hall event, Pima County Sheriff’s Department spokesman Jason Ogan said.

James Eric Fuller, 63, was involuntarily committed after he made threats against a Tea Party member at the Tucson event sponsored by ABC News, Ogan said.

Fuller photographed Trent Humphries and said “You are dead” when Humphries began speaking at the event, according to Ogan.

Humphries told CNN that Fuller’s comment came when the town hall discussion turned toward the issue of gun control.

If you have been shot and are recovering, you really aren’t ready to “make nice” with those you feel are responsible. This is possibly post traumatic stress disorder, and it was a good idea to admit him to a mental health facility. On the other hand, some shooting victims really do want to see some gun control, and don’t accept the argument that it isn’t necessary.


1 Badtux { 01.16.11 at 12:10 pm }

Well darn, Mr. Duff, everybody knows you should be all kissy-nice to someone who just tried to kill you. Clearly Mr. Fuller should have brought tea and crumpets tot he meeting and thanked them for almost getting his butt killed :twisted:.

– Badtux the Snarky Penguin

2 Bryan { 01.16.11 at 3:14 pm }

If the Tea party supporter had just been wounded by a Democrat, who had also gunned down 6 and wounded a dozen others, and another Democrat had attempted to avoid responsibility, my reaction would have been exactly the same, because the conditions would have been exactly the same.

I am no longer a member of the Democratic party, and I do not support the policies of the Obama administration, because they are a continuation of the policies of Bush.

3 oldwhitelady { 01.16.11 at 7:30 pm }

Yeah, I’m glad, too, that they took him to the hospital. He definitely needs some help with his anger and pain. I agree that it is probably PTSD.

4 Steve Bates { 01.16.11 at 8:00 pm }

OTOH, hardly anyone who is not a family member gets to file to commit someone to an institution. The fact that law enforcement chooses to do that IMHO sets a dangerous precedent. If the man had been arrested for his remark, he would probably have spent no more than a few days in jail. As it is, Dog knows when he will be released.

Be it known to all and sundry: If I think a man is threatening my life, I will say bad things about him. Depend upon it.

5 Steve Bates { 01.16.11 at 8:01 pm }

Aside to Duffy: neither you nor the Tea Party seem able to get it through your thick skulls that not everything is political. You know for certain that Bryan’s position would be no different if the political parties were switched: for Dog’s sake, we’re talking about murder here. But just like the Tea Partiers, you seem to need a justification for the destructive things you say. In your case, I suppose that in your ancient and declining state, you have nothing better to do than to tap mean things on the Web. At least your comments don’t kill people.

6 Bryan { 01.16.11 at 8:26 pm }

In most states there is a definite time period for a psychiatric evaluation, usually not more than 96 hours, and then there is a court hearing if the doctors decide the individual does pose a threat to himself or the community.

I have discovered that Arizona is different, in that anyone, not just the family or police, can apply to the state for a psychiatric evaluation if they think that an individual is mentally ill, and doesn’t know it. That is a strange wording, as normally there has to be a perceived threat.

The man is wounded, so the standard jail cell wouldn’t work. Someone needs to look at the wound, making a medical facility a better idea, and there is no criminal charge involved.

That Tea Party guy is just lucky it wasn’t me because I have very strong views about people who point guns at me, much less shoot me, and those views do not include being civil about it. I don’t make threats, I make promises.

7 Kryten42 { 01.16.11 at 10:49 pm }

All these gun loving neo-con John Wayne wannabe wacko’s really annoy the heck outa me! They think that with a gun they are safe as a bank. I’d happily give any three of them a loaded semi-auto pistol and even let them point it at me, and I guarantee you they will be dead before they can fire. Hell, I’d even do it armed with just a knife, to give them a chance. 😈 (of course, anyone who really understands these things knows in close quarters, a knife in trained hands is far deadlier than a gun!) I may be older and a bit slower, but I was very well trained and survived almost 2 years in extremely dangerous combat zones. If it was me armed with a glock and 33 round mag, there would be at least 33 bodies. But it’ll never happen, because if I ever thought I’d be crazy or angry enough to do it, I’d blow my own brains out first! I learned the value of life in Cambodia, in a way that nothing else can ever teach anyone about it. And it does make me angry that life is totally wasted on these neo-con morons! But even so, I’d never take one (except in self-defense). The difference between me and them is that they either don’t care about any life but their own, or believe they can be the judge of who has a right to live.

Half of these neo-cons are abject cowards, and the other half are too stupid to be cowards!

I really do hope there is a Hell, and even if I end up there, I’ll be the one laughing all eternity at all the neo-cons there and there deservedly endless torment! Even Satan couldn’t stand their incomprehensible whining! 😈

8 Bryan { 01.16.11 at 11:10 pm }

If you are looking for “real excitement in your life” go into a shooting situation in civilian clothes. I don’t care how often it is mentioned that “plain clothes officers” are entering the area, you always get at least one uniform who will line up his/her weapon on you, even if you are wearing the jacket with the huge badge on the front and the giant printing on the back.

All you need to lose about 100 people is to have multiple civilians drawing guns and making “shoot-don’t shoot” decisions.

In your house, in your business, in your car, no problem, whatever turns you on, but no working police officer needs to deal with untrained people with loaded weapons wandering around in public. The chances of something tragic happening are just too great.

These fools have no idea of what it costs to take life. If you have to do it, you will still ask yourself if it was really necessary, if there wasn’t another way of handling the situation. If they aren’t questioning their decision, they aren’t human. Given the way they keep avoiding responsibility for what they do, I have my suspicions on that.

9 Kryten42 { 01.16.11 at 11:10 pm }

BTW, to clarify my point above…

When I was chosen for the training I (and others) received, I had to undergo months of intense psychological and physical evaluations. We had to prove that even under the most intense and stressful situations, we could keep our heads and not go crazy. After training, those who passed (a small number of us), were analyzed after every mission. And none of us has ever gone on a shooting rampage. because if any of us ever does, the body count would be extremely high.

And yet, these loony-tunes unsane morons can get a gun as easy as anything. Thankfully, most of them are not very bright, so the damage is usually minimal. Though there have been notable exceptions.

Nobody who doesn’t pass a full psych eval should ever own a weapon of any kind. And they should be retested at least annually. It’ll never happen, because almost all of the neo-cons would loose there beloved guns quick as a wink! Hell… I wouldn’t even allow most of them a car license, or a dog license for that matter! Even though they do seem to care for dogs more than people.

10 Kryten42 { 01.16.11 at 11:22 pm }

LOL posted at the same time, 😉

Yeah, I know what you mean. Been there… If you want *life threatening situation*, go on a duty with ASIO looking after your back! LMAO When I was still a noob at DIO, a couple of senior guys had to go on a security detail, and were told that there would be a couple ASIO guys as backup! One of the senior guy’s instantly said “I quit!” And the other looked balefully at the boss and said “Why do you hate us?” (I should explain, this boss was a relative noob too). After the actual real world relationship with ASIO was carefully explained, he decided ASIO wouldn’t be needed after all. 😆 (I learned a lot about *how things work* in those briefings. 😉

11 Bryan { 01.16.11 at 11:26 pm }

The state of New York requires psych testing before you can be certified as a police officer. I have no idea what New York City does, because they have their own rules, for example, a state carry permit is not valid in New York City, it is a separate licensing process.

One of the things they were really interested in was people who were overly fond of guns, and well as the standard issue of people on a power trips. It wasn’t simply mental illness, it was personality type that would get you dropped. There was no appeal. The process got rid of a few people that I was uncomfortable around, although they were candidates for positions in rural towns well away from my jurisdiction.

When I was doing background checks for potential openings, I asked pointed questions, because it was damn expensive to train someone who would be dropped by the psych eval. I wanted to make selections off the official list after all of the testing was completed, but cronyism was alive and well, so people got probationary appointments and then went through the testing. A real waste of time and money, but you can’t change local politics.