Most of the replies have turned this into a gun debate. Realistically it’s because he was involved in disconnecting service. When you have to do any sort of j

Most of the replies have turned this into a gun debate. Realistically it’s because he was involved in disconnecting service. When you have to do any sort of job that puts you in the position of taking something away from poor people, you’re at high risk, because taking something away from someone who is desperate and likely feels the got the short end from society is not a recipe for a jolly day. In your average American neighborhood none of this would happen. In the rougher poor neighborhoods, everybody thinks everyone is out to get them (and frankly they might be right), is on edge, and likely has a loose association to the law or social mores. Without going into an entire sociology diatribe, in America there are many reasons someone may end up poor, but low impulse control, lack of education, and an inability to follow rules tend to top the list, all of which can lead to very troubling outcomes that wouldn’t happen among the gainfully employed average, whom also pay their bills and would not be targeted for disconnection of service. The majority of Americans own or have access to firearms (although it’s barely a minority of “households”), but incidents involving firearms happen in poorer neighborhoods predominantly. The mix is not great, and we should do something about it as a society but it’s a complex and somewhat intractable issue that’s not fully solved by just throwing money at it (just look at council houses in the UK as an example of similar outcomes despite social support).