Home | About | Donate

With History of Domestic Violence, Texas Gunman Fits Mass Shooter Profile


With History of Domestic Violence, Texas Gunman Fits Mass Shooter Profile

Julia Conley, staff writer

"And yet blinding misogyny is never considered a possible political motivator for mass violence."


He spent time in prison yet he could purchase multiple guns and ammunition…assault rifles, no less. And the vendor was a brick and mortar store…not a gun show or private sale.


"As Soraya Chamaly wrote in Rolling Stone after the Pulse shooting, Mateen’s ex-wife described him as “showing no sign of violent radicalism,” and argued, “it’s time our society started to think of physical abuse, possessiveness, and men’s entitlement to act in those ways toward women as terroristic, violent and radical.”

If a major cause of domestic violence is sexual frustration, is it as prevalent in places where sex education and sex surrogacy is practiced?


If we continue to focus our understanding of gun violence on the mental states or pathologies of the shooters, we are lost. We live in a society where millions of women and children are abused. It’s an epidemic. The epidemic has to be stopped.

But the epidemic of gun violence is specifically related to the accessibility of guns. Plenty of “sane” people slaughter with guns. The Vegas shooter was having money problems and he rationally planned the mass murder over a period of time. Anybody can snap at any time. If there is a gun at hand, this is what happens. And will continue to happen if these killing machines aren’t taken out of society.


That seems to me a very big “if,” as in one I’ve never seen before. Please document or retract.


Obviously a breakdown in the system. Supposedly, he should not have been legally able to make those purchases.


In case you don’t know how to Google, I’ll do it for you this time Barbara::


A blog (from 8 years ago), without references and not about domestic violence.

Try again, or just let it drop. At best, all you could do would be speculate about ways to excuse this guy’s behavior, which the USAF didn’t. But then they didn’t list him in the DV database, which would have prevented his owning the guns he used Sunday.

And you don’t gain anything by mocking me. Better to source your claims before you publish them.


Change Congress and you’ll change gun laws. And, lots of other death-cult practices by males, in this country. Sweep them all out. Every last, stinking one of them. Enough of this death-cult is way too much, most times. This is definitely one of those times. This is pure Texas & DoD fustercluck, yet again.


Reuters story leads with CHILD ABUSE … but goes on to the rest of the horrors …

and when I went back to look at it, it had been changed.

This one still leads with attack on infant son.



We live in a culture that celebrates violence------and the fundamental root is militarism.


That’s a threat, and it’s not funny. Flagged.


What’s an “assault rifle”? Any scary looking, but essentially harmless rifle you don’t like?
AR-15’s are among the least harmful things you can own.


What gun laws would you change?
Is it finally time to ban shotguns?
Do you support only LE being able to have shotguns?


H. Rapp Brown, during the Black Power movement, said that violence is as American as apple pie. I would guess that Devin Patrick Kelly was himself beaten as a child.


Tell that to the victims and their families of the Las Vegas massacre or Columbine or Sandy Hook and this murderous rampage in the church. Assault rifles are just that: meant for ASSAULT/KILLING and not just for insecure idiots to use for target practice. The rifle used by the Texas killer was an ASSAULT rifle…not a .22 or other rifle used for hunting purposes.

“Least harmful things you can own”…you are being facetious, I hope.


That’s a spurious and libelous accusation, dangerous in this atmosphere. But I’m glad you recognized it as a joke.


One flag does not hide a comment, so plainly there are others here who see your “joke” as ugly. Please take it down.


I think we are wrong to just pretend that the second amendment to the Constitution does not exist and does not provide for an individual right to bear arms. Essentially every one of the approximately 200 countries in the world have a constitution and, amongst those, only three include the right to bear arms: Guatemala, Mexico, and the U.S… So like it or not, that is the club we are in.

While the Supreme Court has left open the possibility of banning some kinds of rapid-fire weapons, that is currently being decided in the Kolbe v. Hogan case (see http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/kolbe-v-hogan/ if you want to read the arguments in that case) for semi-automatics. This may be a close case, but with Justice Gorsuch on the bench, I am not expecting that bans on semi-automatic weapons will be declared constitutional.

My personal feeling is that if we want to do something meaningful on the issue of violence and gun violence in particular, we need to be doing the research necessary to find Constitutional and innovative solutions. Congress has placed a ban on the CDC doing research in this area. That needs to be rescinded. The NSF and the CDC need to be spending a good deal of their funds in studying the prevention of violence in America; gathering uniform and systematic data on the topic; and field testing peer reviewed proposals. We need an evidence-based public policy in this area that can not violate Constitutional rights.
Further, more effort should be put into prevention of suicide by gun (our biggest gun violence issue in terms of number of deaths) and deaths from stolen guns. For example, we should have incentives for things like biometric triggers that could prevent unauthorized use.


Hopefully you’re right.

Moronic calls for a ban on rifles such as an AR-15 is a solution looking for a problem.
AR-15 type rifles are among the least dangerous items an American can own.

The latest FBI statistics put all combined rifle deaths, of which AR-15s are a subset, at 248 in 2014. And those number have gone down every year as ownership as increased.

Too many deaths, to be sure, but an insignificant cause of mortality in a country of around 300,000,000 people.

Yes, horrific events like the Texas church shooting can occur, but are extremely rare.
Millions of Americans own millions of AR-15’s and fire millions and millions of rounds a year and never hurt a soul.

If one were honestly concerned about health and safety, why would “assault rifles” even be on the radar?
More people are killed each year with shotguns and I don’t hear anyone here screaming to ban them.

In 2016, 701 people died in boating accidents.
According to the USDOT, 818 people died from bicycle accidents in 2015, the latest published data.
How about the 60,000 or so who will die of opioid misuse this year alone?

Who here is screaming for the constitution to be re-written for those deaths?
“But if it saves one life…”. Yeah? Then let’s apply that rule starting from the top down on causes of preventable mortality.

Banning AR-15 = Straining at gnats.