3 ms·

> "The night before Nasim Aghdam opened fire in a courtyard at YouTube's headquarters Tuesday afternoon, Mountain View police found the San Diego woman sleeping

by alehul 9y ago

> "The night before Nasim Aghdam opened fire in a courtyard at YouTube's headquarters Tuesday afternoon, Mountain View police found the San Diego woman sleeping in her car. She had been reported missing by her family in Southern California, and her father Ismail Aghdam told police she might be going to YouTube because she 'hated' the company. Police called the family at 2 a.m. Tuesday to say she'd been found and that everything was 'under control,' her father said." The most noteworthy part of the article to me, granted that this excerpt is taken from a different San Jose news source. Could this have been prevented? Should the father's comments have been enough reasonable suspicion to arrest her, or at least search her for firearms and confiscate them, given her threat level to society? Edit: The replies do offer good points, so thank you! I'm personally a supporter of the Second Amendment as well; it's just heartbreaking, especially if any of the victims die, to know just how close we were to stopping it.

jacquesm 9y ago
Lone wolf crazies are the hardest to protect against as an open society. Say she was arrested and her gun confiscated. Nothing actually happened, so she'd be out on the street two days later and could go and buy another gun for a retry.
- salgernon 9y ago
  A mentally ill relative of mine in another state (us citizens here) threatened “to shoot” me in an email and asserted he had a gun. I contacted law enforcement in his area and they picked him up and based on his behavior and statements he was put in a 72 hour psych hold. During this, the police and mental health workers were able to convince him to give up his gun. This was about 6 years ago and as far as anyone knows, he hasn’t re-armed himself. I guess my point: If you have a gun, you may feel justified in using it to solve your problems with violence (suicide or other). If you don’t have a gun, the friction of acquiring one could be sufficient to deter you from trying to get one.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    That's about the best possible outcome. Unfortunately there are also plenty of counter examples where law enforcement was alerted and nothing happened.
- tantalor 9y ago
  > go and buy another gun Presumably having the first gun confiscated would prevent that in the background check.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    She would not necessarily have to buy the second gun legally. There are 100's of millions of guns floating around, getting one is easy. I wonder how long she had this gun and where it came from.
dec0dedab0de 9y ago
Should the father's comments have been enough reasonable suspicion to arrest her, or at least search her for firearms and confiscate them, given her threat level to society? Not from the information in this article. That would mean any adult who gets upset, and goes on a roadtrip without telling their family, could get arrested. If the missing persons report noted that she could be dangerous, then that's a different story.
INTPenis 9y ago
I think the only thing that could have been done differently is to ask the police to search her for potential firearms but then you have to wonder if they're legal or not and if they'd have the right to confiscate them.
arkades 9y ago
Sounds like you're doing a little monday morning quarterbacking here. Neither of us heard the dad's tone or saw his body language, so neither of us knows just how strongly he was communicating "she's going to Youtube because she hates them." But, if we are to judge on the words alone, nothing in that phrasing says "mass shooting in the offing." Most people who go to the offices of a company they have a grievance with are going there to complain or raise a ruckus, not start shooting folks. As evidenced by, you know, the extremely anomalous nature of this shooting. ("extremely anomalous" as in "mass shooting of a corporation you're unhappy with", not just "mass shooting," because those are a popular pastime in the US.)
maherbeg 9y ago
If you start threatening people with your weapons, you should have them confiscated, or rather more likely to have them confiscated. This is one of the few instances where this could have been completely prevented.

by alehul 9y ago

jacquesm 9y ago

Lone wolf crazies are the hardest to protect against as an open society. Say she was arrested and her gun confiscated. Nothing actually happened, so she'd be out on the street two days later and could go and buy another gun for a retry.

salgernon 9y ago
A mentally ill relative of mine in another state (us citizens here) threatened “to shoot” me in an email and asserted he had a gun. I contacted law enforcement in his area and they picked him up and based on his behavior and statements he was put in a 72 hour psych hold. During this, the police and mental health workers were able to convince him to give up his gun. This was about 6 years ago and as far as anyone knows, he hasn’t re-armed himself. I guess my point: If you have a gun, you may feel justified in using it to solve your problems with violence (suicide or other). If you don’t have a gun, the friction of acquiring one could be sufficient to deter you from trying to get one.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  That's about the best possible outcome. Unfortunately there are also plenty of counter examples where law enforcement was alerted and nothing happened.
tantalor 9y ago
> go and buy another gun Presumably having the first gun confiscated would prevent that in the background check.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  She would not necessarily have to buy the second gun legally. There are 100's of millions of guns floating around, getting one is easy. I wonder how long she had this gun and where it came from.

dec0dedab0de 9y ago

Should the father's comments have been enough reasonable suspicion to arrest her, or at least search her for firearms and confiscate them, given her threat level to society? Not from the information in this article. That would mean any adult who gets upset, and goes on a roadtrip without telling their family, could get arrested. If the missing persons report noted that she could be dangerous, then that's a different story.

INTPenis 9y ago

I think the only thing that could have been done differently is to ask the police to search her for potential firearms but then you have to wonder if they're legal or not and if they'd have the right to confiscate them.

arkades 9y ago

Sounds like you're doing a little monday morning quarterbacking here. Neither of us heard the dad's tone or saw his body language, so neither of us knows just how strongly he was communicating "she's going to Youtube because she hates them." But, if we are to judge on the words alone, nothing in that phrasing says "mass shooting in the offing." Most people who go to the offices of a company they have a grievance with are going there to complain or raise a ruckus, not start shooting folks. As evidenced by, you know, the extremely anomalous nature of this shooting. ("extremely anomalous" as in "mass shooting of a corporation you're unhappy with", not just "mass shooting," because those are a popular pastime in the US.)

maherbeg 9y ago

If you start threatening people with your weapons, you should have them confiscated, or rather more likely to have them confiscated. This is one of the few instances where this could have been completely prevented.