Ed's Blog

"Some people know everything, but that's all they know."



The Washington Navy Yard shootings reignited the never-ending debate between gun controllers and gun owners over gun control. You’ve heard the arguments numerous times so I won’t repeat them here; and it’s unnecessary because gun control is going nowhere at the federal level. We have almost as many guns as we have people in the United States; and gun owners have more political clout than gun controllers. The question remains, however, how do we prevent mass shootings? Here’s a three-pronged solution to the problem.  (Read the full column at EWRoss.com)


Filed under: Politics, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

22 Responses

  1. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Finally!! Someone that “get’s it”. The longer we keep arguing over the merits of some political or personal agenda that has nothing to do with the actual solution to violence in society, the longer innocent victims will continue to die. THANK YOU.

    By John Jenco

  2. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    I think that the man never should have been employed at the place to begin with. He had a history of problems while he was in the service. He was also apparently highly religious, so, suggestible. Was he fully responsible for his actions, could he think his way out of a wet paper bag, or was he just one more not-very-bright person who wandered into the military, had no real purpose or direction in life, and was probably under a fair amount of mental duress just trying to live in the 21st century, where things seem to get more complicated on a daily basis? What was he about? Was he in the process of getting fired, and this was basically another case of ‘going postal’, retribution for internal politics, was he just violent in his basic nature, and this was more or less his way of expressing that he’d had a bad day?

    While he was in the service, did he serve under combat conditions? Did he develop McVeigh-Muhammad-Hasan syndrome, just plain too much military to keep it ‘sane’? Was he part of a gang? Did he do it for the life insurance monaaaah? The exploding zealots overseas were rumored to have been promised a healthy stipend for their families, in exchange for going kamikaze against our military…

    By Bert Walker

  3. Reposted from LinkedIn says:


    That’s a very well reasoned, common sense approach to a growing problem. Unfortunately, you and your government have focused on different problems, and each of you has identified specialized solutions to your distinct mission.

    The problem you see is the mass killing of innocent citizens. Your suggestions are appropriate and effective in reducing incidents of mass shootings.

    The problem the government sees is an armed citizenry that is the final check on government overreach. The very same mass shootings you identify as “the problem” actually aid the government in addressing its problem. We should not be distracted by all the grand standing and weeping by elected officials. We must stay focused on the fact they offer no substantive progress toward the problem of mass shootings as they continue playing the “One Note Samba” of gun confiscation.

    Your article correctly indicates the government has taken virtually no action directed at limiting mass shootings while it has gone to great pains to disarm the population. We see it in Obama’s recent statement “Prayers and tears are not enough, we must do more…” His “more” will be yet another attempt to disarm the law abiding citizens, wholly disconnected from any mass shooting, and no effort to address the drugs linked to the vast majority of mass shootings.

    By Peter Ross

  4. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Ed it further needs to be broken down as it is not as simple as a lone individual as is in evidence by the Chicago park shootings and followed over the weekend by random killing and wounding folks just walking on the sidewalk. Seems the motis operandi is different in these separate but tragic incidents.

    By Frank Fox

  5. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Well Bert people have lost many things due to some technological advances we have. I am 66, when I was young we had to use our imaginations to amuse ourselves. We put card board on our bike’s spokes to sound like a motor, we played tag, football in the light of a naked 60 watt bulb. We went to a vacant lot and played fliers and rollers. Catch three flies or nine rollers you got to go in and bat. Now kids have to be plugged in to X Boxes, computers, an MP3 players. All good technology, but misused as much as drugs.

    Now movies, video games, if indulged enough, will train you how to react to certain situations. Unfortunately violent actions from kids who down load this stuff for years then are forced into reality by age, and can’t cope. So they react as they have been trained electronically for the formative years. Just look back when parenting skills were better, and kids didn’t have this technology, you could sleep with your doors open. You could leave the keys in your car ignition. We should be weening children off this technology in the formative years. Of course those who don’t realize that capitalism can be good or harmful will disagree because it means less monies would be made off of these products.

    Hell they don’t even teach kids how to tell time anymore in school. They can’t even make change without a cash register. We are reaping what we have sown.

    Are you yanking my chain Bert? You should know all of this.

    By Frank Fox

  6. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Here I was agreeing with this guy and then he said: “Variations of the stop-and-frisk policy used so successfully in New York City, based on behavioral profiling, could greatly reduce incidents of mass shootings.” Total bullshit. How about just letting everybody be free unless they are duly convicted of a crime? Free to come and go at their convenience, free to be armed or not as they choose, free to speak and write without a government license. Just free. Why is this so hard for people to understand? Has the public school brainwashing been that successful?

    By Bill Martin

  7. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    . The shooter at the Navy Yard did have a history of Mental Health issues including recent events reported by local police before the shooting. The problem is that under current laws the VA was not allowed to share that information with the company doing the background check. In NYS Civil Service (and most Federal jobs as employee or contractor) your medical history can’t be used against you in employment decisions and the HIPAA laws regarding medical history privacy, carry with them some steep penalties for violations. This is why universal background checks for all sales that includes mental health screening is a part of the proposed laws.. that can’t get anywhere because the mass shootings are consider 32 unrelated incidents.

    A Timeline Of Mass Shootings In The US Since Columbine |

    and why this is actually considered the soluition

    NRA’s Wayne LaPierre: ‘There Weren’t Enough Good Guys With Guns’ At Navy Yard Shooting


    By Daniel Lark

  8. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Without writing a college paper on the general subject of military/civilian hiring practices and boring ourselves to tears with this subject anymore, let’s just hope that the military can demonstrate a quality comprehensive fix for this situation that will get folks interviewed and evaluated on a regular basis for suitability for presence on a military post and retention in their chosen/appointed job functions, uniform, or no.

    By Bert Walker

  9. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Frank, I can’t believe that you are implying that the ‘Domino theory’ used to justify VN was in away bogus…. just because it never happened.

    Bert, the thing is that this is not a just a military/civilian hiring practice issue. Years ago to get jobs filled by Snowden were reserved for those who were either politically connected or family of the politically connected. Then it was opened up like other Open Competitive CS jobs.

    Privatizing services provided by the Government as been the norm. at the Federal, state and Local level for decades. For example, no one usually maintains a fleet of vehicles and trucks any more (and the mechanics needed to maintain them) except for combat vehicles. For the most part the process has worked.

    Most laws of fair labor practices cover the military, veterans and contractors also. So the trick will be finding that balance between personal privacy and getting companies the information that they need to make safe hiring decisions. I know companies in private industry that won’t give any feedback on a former employee other than confirming the period that they worked there. Everybody is wary of litigation. Former employees get lawyer and sues when they are turned down for a job and tries to blame it on a bad job reference from former employer.

    We had one sue my old employer because they had an open bar at a Xmas party, where he drank too much, then rapped his care around a pole on the way home. He actually won some compensation.

    By Daniel Lark

  10. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Spot on!

    By Jeff Machtig

  11. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    1. Since the demise of the Asylum system in the early 1960’s, various levels of government have consistently de-funded or underfunded the promised replacement mental health programs and facilities. Governments rejoiced at this unexpected financial windfall.

    2. Our society presently does not have the will to adequately deal with those who are insane and that should not be in the general population.

    3. In every case, those around each mass shooter knew that the person was not only unstable but violently dangerous. In every case, assistance (hospitalization or incarceration) was unavailable due to financial and/or legal constraints.

    4. Therefore, until our society adequately deals with the mentally incompetent and the insane we will continue to have these sorts of events on a more-or-less routine basis.

    By Wylie Johnson

  12. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Part of the issue is the Progressive feeling that people have a right to live on the street and decline treatment.

    By Peter Wells

  13. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Great article!

    By Avery Dalton

  14. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Formal psychiatric diagnoses matter medically and legally and bear consideration. The Aurora and Navy Yard shooters had diagnosed or undiagnosed mental illnesses. That seems fairly evident. Consider; however, the Fort Hood shooter – a psychiatrist – who killed as a matter of ideological choice as opposed to psychiatric symptomology. Assuming that crazy = criminal (or vice versa) seems an unwarranted oversimplification.

    While the Navy Yard shooter may have been on SSRIs I am less inclined to accept that the medication is the causal agent. First – SSRI efficacy is not firmly established and their effiicacy is greatly diminished by severe mental disorders. Second – it seems like the shooter might have had other undiagnosed psychiatric issues besides for which SSRIs aren’t medically indicated.

    I do agree that psychiatric medications tend to be casually overprescribed. Psychiatrists will even disagree between themselves about the applicability and efficacy of medications and may take steps to reduce patient dependency on medications whenever possible to incorporate counseling if appropriate for a patient.

    By Scott Hibbard

  15. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    A sound article that provides thoughtful insights into the issue.

    By Mark Carter

  16. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Great article. Finally someone calling for the use of statistical data instead of emotions to decide an issue. If hard data, instead of emotional outcry, supported an anti-gun agenda I would give it serious consideration. However, it does not.

    By Grady Emmons Masters Intelligence, CPP

  17. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Good Article, Thank you. The recommendations you give hit both sides of the conversation. I (and many others) have been talking about SSRIs for a while now, but legislators (both state and federal) seem unwilling to listen. The CDC keeps very good statistics on gun violence, but is only allowed to collect those statistics in about five states, apparently per congressional restriction. And, of course, personal responsibility seems to be anathema to the liberals (although I have been hearing the same from the “conservative” side as well.)

    Wouldn’t it be nice if our legislators actually attacked the problem rather than just trying to make headlines by turning the populace into sheep?

    By Paul Degenkolb

  18. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Great post Ed. Mr. Primm, I concur, true security vetting and back ground checks are nothing like they used to be. There is no way the Navy Yard shooter should have even come close to attaining a clearance based on past standards. In a society where everyone is supposed to succeed, we don’t want to report on anyone “not normal” because that might be considered bullying or judging them and we can’t have that. Group hugs, hand holding, and ignoring bad or improper behavior is now the norm. Personal responsibility has gone the way of common sense, its not that common any more.

    By Marcus Alden

  19. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    We will always have ideologues and monsters among us. There’s no way to effectively weed these out on a consistent basis. However, the psychotic are another story and by effectively institutionalizing such persons, we remove a significant portion of the common threat. We will not eliminate the Sirhan Sirhans of the world, but we will cull out the others.

    By Wylie Johnson

  20. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    At the risk of self-promotion, I published a lengthy monograph on this exact topic earlier this year after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings. Each time we have a mass shooting, it once again highlights the tragedy of a politically-motivated agenda that has effectively stalemated any opportunity to pursue real solutions that would actually reduce gun violence in America.


    By John Jenco

  21. Reposted from LinkedIn says:

    Ed ross, you’re absolutely correct, but in my opinion you did not emphasize the role of street drugs in shootings. street drugs. in my opinion, are the plague of our time, with one of the consequences being paranoia, and with lsd, insanity
    By David Rich

  22. AMTang says:

    One might also consider that according to the Supreme Court the police have no duty to protect someone. Castle Rock v. Gonzales

    Also, Warren v. DC

    So, having been diarmed on all military inatllations and having limited access to defensive firearms in one’s home within certain local jurisdictions, law abiding citizens are at the mercy of whomever breaks the law and uses a firearm in a mass murder such as the Washington Navy Yard and Ft. Hood Texas!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Share This Blog

Bookmark and Share

EWRoss on Twiter

RSS EWRoss.com RSS

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
%d bloggers like this: