4 ms·

What could have changed if they did follow up? As I understand it, he did nothing illegal until he took his first shot. How would the FBI know when someone go

by giarc 9y ago

What could have changed if they did follow up? As I understand it, he did nothing illegal until he took his first shot. How would the FBI know when someone goes from posting threats on Youtube to an actual shooter? Go to YouTube/FB/IG/any forum and you'll see millions of threats, 99.999% of them don't ever result in a bad outcome. Additionally, how many tips come in? How many do they follow up with and how many turn out to be nothing? I think the FBI has a tough job trying to decipher what is a real threat and what is just talk, and I'm not sure how they tell the difference. Is it threat + owning gun + militia involvement = mass shooter? If so, how do you stop him other than following him 24/7?

berberous 9y ago
This says they failed to even investigate. They could have talked to him. If he was clearly a threat, even if they had no legal avenues to retain him, they could have notified the school, local police, etc., which perhaps could have done something. For example, the school could have increased security.
mhb 9y ago
That's a good question and one which should be raised whenever new methods of data collection are proposed.
merpnderp 9y ago
This guy was a nut and likely had committed multiple crimes beforehand that could have been discovered in an investigation.
dyeje 9y ago
Seems like you could stop him by not letting him own a gun.
xxxdarrenxxx 9y ago
There is also possible hypocrisy. If they'd invade based on assumption, the headlines would be "corrupt police", and people would leave angry comments about how the system doesn't embrace innocence before proven guilty. We also don't get a number here about the amount off false/fake/ambiguous tips. Is it a 100, 1000 or 20.000 a week? Science doesn't need to tell us how most off us experienced or know about guilt. Shoulda,coulda,woulda.. There are even entire therapy groups dedicated to people who get stuck in a guilt trip who get in a deep depression because they can't stop thinking about what "they should have done" after a traumatic event to prevent it. This is (scientifically) considered a natural possible response, severity of said guilt seemingly tied to the severity off the occured event.

by giarc 9y ago

berberous 9y ago

This says they failed to even investigate. They could have talked to him. If he was clearly a threat, even if they had no legal avenues to retain him, they could have notified the school, local police, etc., which perhaps could have done something. For example, the school could have increased security.

mhb 9y ago

That's a good question and one which should be raised whenever new methods of data collection are proposed.

merpnderp 9y ago

This guy was a nut and likely had committed multiple crimes beforehand that could have been discovered in an investigation.

dyeje 9y ago

Seems like you could stop him by not letting him own a gun.

xxxdarrenxxx 9y ago

There is also possible hypocrisy. If they'd invade based on assumption, the headlines would be "corrupt police", and people would leave angry comments about how the system doesn't embrace innocence before proven guilty. We also don't get a number here about the amount off false/fake/ambiguous tips. Is it a 100, 1000 or 20.000 a week? Science doesn't need to tell us how most off us experienced or know about guilt. Shoulda,coulda,woulda.. There are even entire therapy groups dedicated to people who get stuck in a guilt trip who get in a deep depression because they can't stop thinking about what "they should have done" after a traumatic event to prevent it. This is (scientifically) considered a natural possible response, severity of said guilt seemingly tied to the severity off the occured event.