The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    jollyroger's picture

    Uber driver kills 6 between runs. Background checks?

    By jollyroger on Sun, 02/21/2016 - 9:51pm |

    As details emerge about Jason Dalton, alleged Kalamazoo rampage killer, troubling peripheral issues arise.

     

    Consistent with the cliche " he was such a nice, quiet guy...", two neighbors of long vintage are quoted. One describes him as " well mannered and pleasant" over the 15 year acquaintance. Another said he was a "nice guy" although prone to fire a pistol randomly out his back door.

     

    WTF??

     

    It seems to me emblematic of a pathologically casual societal attitude towards firearms that blasting away from inside your home is considered innocuous.

     

    In addition, while I understand that Uber does not claim thoroughly to vet the driver they send you beyond perhaps a screen for prior criminal convictions and moving violations, it is disturbing to find that whatever their inquiries into the mental health of their sharing economy ambassadors, a propensity to discharge weapons ad libitum comes in under the radar.

     

    Personally, let me go on record:  If you live across the street from me and fire at invisible targets while sitting in your home, expect me to solicit police intervention.

     

    Dalton's neighbors, in retrospect, would have been doing everyone a favor if they had followed suit.

    Comments

    It's a horrific reminder of the Beltway sniper attacks in 2005 ... and of how easily it can still take place today in various ways. We've learned nothing. We've done nothing.

    Uber isn't responsible beyond how they check their drivers, and they are certainly not to blame for this - oddly, he didn't kill passengers. But the last thing that has ever made sense to me is to call a stranger to pick me up in their private car which is barely regulated or licensed. Maybe it's because I'm a woman.

    In the end, Jolly, you have an interesting point. How can neighbors, even in a rural neighborhood, not "say something"? Frankly, because unless there's something obviously dangerous going on, we all tend to give the crazy neighbor their space and keep our kids away from them.

    Hindsight is 20/20, but the counter to turn 'em in is leave 'em alone ... where's the dividing line?


    by barefooted on Sun, 02/21/2016 - 10:52pm

    I suppose the thrust of my bewilderment is precisely that shooting when you are not in an enclosed range is ipso facto dangerous-- every bullet comes down somewhere, after all

    And since his shooting was SO senseless ( bad enough the celebratory discharges of rifles at weddings in some cultures) uber would have gotten some help if he had caught a beef from this practice, which they might then have discerned


    by jollyroger on Sun, 02/21/2016 - 11:21pm

    Plus, this is so crazy that if you were to check some box on a pre gun purchase psych inventory agree/ disagree: "people should be free when in their homes to fire guns at will" that ought to disqualify you from gun ownership prospectively and get your guns seized retrospectively.


    by jollyroger on Sun, 02/21/2016 - 11:32pm

    What do you say to those that shoot cans off some stump or other for target practice out back? On their private property while breaking no laws?

    If you're on your back porch smoking a joint, should they call the cops? There are folks that consider that an equal crime.


    by barefooted on Mon, 02/22/2016 - 12:42am

    If they do it without a backstop and theree's anything in the line of fire should they miss?  Fuck'em  plus, Dawson was just shooting at the sky,( I guess to hear the gun go off?).

     

    Im not suggesting that absent harm its a crime, but a disqualification for gun ownership.  Bear in mind I have been known to go about strapped.


    by jollyroger on Mon, 02/22/2016 - 3:33am

    Wheh, dodged the bullet - thought you were taking us in a different direction re: strap-ons, rick-rolled so to speak. 


    by PeraclesPlease on Mon, 02/22/2016 - 4:23am

    I have a similar qualm with my daughter "just calling a taxi" - for me, I'd think nothing of it, but for her it's paying to put her in a car late at night with a strange man - not quite the safest scenario. Obviously there are additional precautions to take, but simply hailing one off the street with no thought, no messaging? Nope.

    Funny (ha ha?) how there are 2 worlds, like that HuffPost article on how women prepare for dates.

    This is again an example where I think it's important to finally have a female president, to help make these alternate universes - different perceptions & needs - explicit and accounted for.


    by PeraclesPlease on Mon, 02/22/2016 - 12:58am

    Frankly, it's more frightening for us older folks than for younger women. They don't experience the automatic, knee jerk assumption of a possible threat; and in a way I applaud that, because it's exactly what we wanted - a strength and fearlessness that we hoped to give them.

    But the need for always being aware, always watching where you are and who you're with, always being hyper-alert if you're alone and always -- always -- sensing your surroundings isn't generational. It's just necessary.


    by barefooted on Mon, 02/22/2016 - 1:28am

    Yeah, but I'm trying to postpone the experience that gives them that automatic knee jerk assumption. Only need 1 time to be trained for life.


    by PeraclesPlease on Mon, 02/22/2016 - 4:44am

    Dalton was working his way up from reckless disregard through depraved indifference and then arriving at purposeful murder.

     

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7996596

    Abstract

    People often celebrate holidays by firing guns into the air without realizing that this can cause serious injury or death. The present study identified 118 patients treated since 1985 who were hit with spent bullets. Most (77%) were hit in the head. The mortality rate was 32%, which is significantly higher than for all gunshot wound victims in general seen at the same medical center. Laws have been enacted to help prevent people shooting into the sky, but more education and enforcement are required to prevent these serious a


    by jollyroger on Mon, 02/22/2016 - 9:00pm

    12 people got hit per year, JR,  4 of whom died. There were 24,700 murders in 1991 in the middle of this decade of cracking gangs studied. And O presume some of this celebration fire was from automatic weapons. We're at "number of people who choked on gnocchi" or "accidental implement with pencil". Lawnmower fatalities were greater.


    by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 7:20am

    Precious blood of the sweet baby Jesus, you are fucking obtuse!

     

    My point goes to the societal complaisance of permitting irresponsible/insane assholes to buy or retain their guns.

     

    The relevant toll here is 6 .  

     

    This is your typical bullshit, oh, we cant cure all, fuck the policy questions.

     

    Not even Wayne La Pierre endorses shooting into the air for no fucking reason!


    by jollyroger on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 10:15am

    Fell free to make the case: Dawson should have owned a gun


    by jollyroger on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 10:15am

    Perhaps you were in a coma during the excesses around 1991, but there's a lot less shooting into the air for no fucking reason in the US these days, and thus you required a study of 20 years ago to make your point.

    Believe it or not, our current rash of people shooting at each other is much much more dangerous. Following Pareto's rule, that's probably where we should put our energy.

    (your typical bullshit is "something bad happened/someone I disagree with, so let's troll the background of X suspect and throw all the excesses of his youth, the programs he watched, type of spring water imbibed, fight with neighbor over 4th of July barbecue,..." and whatever else into the equation. Life's too short.)

    A lot of people shouldn't own guns. The NRA has made it difficult to keep them out of the hands of most. Dawson doesn't really stick out compared to the Bundys and other freaks of nature.


    by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 10:21am

    By the way, you troll, that was only one of multiple studies, but your post does not deserve the time to adduce the others.  Google them yourself, you clearly have too much time on your hands!


    by jollyroger on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 10:22am

    Pissy mood you've got yourself in.

    Since article doesn't describe what the landscape outside his rural backdoor - if it's a mile of open field, shooting a gun is fairly safe, though horizontal is safer than 45 degrees. That is why some people choose to live in the country, BTW.

    Anyway, him running signs and traffic lights as an Uber driver scaring the shit out of his passengers in recent weeks is probably a lot more pertinent than the rural gun behavior that didn't seem to be directed at people. "Randomly in the air" in all likelihood means "almost vertical but slightly forward, not stupidly straight up" which doesn't cover a lot of distance and in the countryside has almost no chance of hitting anyone in most cases, as seen from the paucity of celebration shootings actually hitting someone. The number of celebratory gunfire killings that "came from a mile away" or happened in cities make it clear that the near-straight-up in the countryside is not such the dangerous act as most other scenarios.


    by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 10:50am

    Let's do this slowly

    Dawson periodically ( at the very least) disturbed the peace, or, in some jurisdictions violated the sensible prohibition against shooting at nothing for no reason.

     

    His neighbors never called the police, so no record of any sort was made.

     

    He applied for and received clearance to drive for uber.

     

    He should not have been at large, le alone driving strangers.

     

    You would not want to ride with him (!) Let alone live in his town.

     

    Only people numb to the question of legitimate vs illegitimate gun ownership would join the observations "he was a nice quiet guy who once in a while would sit in his house and fire out the door."

     

    Don't ya think?


    by jollyroger on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 10:46am

    He apparently had trespassers in the countryside going through his backyard. He wasn't firing out the front door, and I don't know what the back door/backyard/terrain out the back looked like. It doesn't give the impression of re-enacting a Vietnam firefight. Firing into the ground can be much more dangerous, as is of course firing at someone. The initial reports on this sounded like he was a nice normal Uber driver who happened to kill non-passengers between pickups. Overall, I still don't really see a predictive behavior between trying to scare away rural backyard trespassers and intentionally gunning down pedestrians in the city, but I guess we can do predictive profiles on everything and get a link somehow.

    I do agree that the more people who own guns, the more likely stupid or intentional deaths will happen. But I don't live in the US of stupid fucking eh, and where I do live, people aren't running around with weapons, so I've lost me edge of analyzing the stupidity from a guns Uber-Alles perspective. Here's the closest I get, from my Zuma Beach/north desert days.... shapes your attitude about hitchhikers.... a lot of lonely up in that desert.... sometimes things just happen.

     

     

     


    by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 11:24am

    And if he had a trespasser directly in view, he should be justified in discharging a firearm, so that any resultant death whether the trespasser or a bystander would be exempt from prosecution?


    by jollyroger on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 11:25am

    To bring closer focus, in California a new law empowers confiscation of firearms from those who pose a danger themselves or others.

     

    Your "thoughts"?

    http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article5115...


    by jollyroger on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 11:11am

    Well that takes all the fun out of it. What's left, tin cans?


    by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 11:19am

    I take it that as to the law cited you have, (unsurprisingly), no thoughts.


    by jollyroger on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 11:26am

    I was bored after my first response, so I gave you 2 music videos instead. Seems like you got a bargain.


    by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 11:42am

    Jolly, there is a guy next to me here in N Texas who loves to get out and fire his guns---at random times, like last Sunday morning. I am giving him a wide berth, the sheriff was over here wanting to know if I was him because he was trying to serve a warning on behalf of another neighbor.

    So far he's just a distraction but the fact that there is no recourse bugs the hell out of me. He's a caretaker not the owner. So I'm waiting it out and if he gets too close to the property line I might have to call the Sheriff. But with this kind of guy----he was drunk at out by the road yelling at a neighbor across from him---you have to realize that if you make a complaint, you're on his list. For now he's not an immediate threat to me and the odds favor just ignoring him.


    by Oxy Mora on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 12:24pm

    At least he has come to the sheriff's attention.

     

    Its not like Dalton himself wouldn't be better off if someone took away his gun two months ago...


    by jollyroger on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 12:47pm

    He has two kids and a wife, BTW.... Not just a crazy loner.


    by jollyroger on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 12:52pm

    Maybe he's just shooting down drones - if #8 or #9 birdshot, no need to worry..... unless like Dick Cheney he shoots you in the face.


    by PeraclesPlease on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 1:27pm

    Shotguns?  One word...streetsweeper


    by jollyroger on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 2:08pm


    by jollyroger on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 2:19pm

    I don't know about Texas but most if not all residential areas should have ordinances making it illegal to discharge a firearm within its city/county limits and offenders would face arrest and gun confiscation.  It's certainly true here in NM where an acquaintance of mine faced a Swat Team for this offense.

    The shooter in Kalamazoo and your shooter neighbor appear to be in residential areas and both were and are an  obvious hazard to people's  safety along with being nuts. Neighbors ignoring this crazy dangerous behavior didn't turn out well for the victims in Kalamazoo and i hope these flashing warning signs from your neighbor are addressed before he becomes more dangerous.


    by Peter (not verified) on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 4:27pm

    Many states have laws banning local communities from regulating guns. The reason is to stop liberal cities in red states from enacting any type of gun control.  I've read numerous articles on this problem over the last few years. I did a quick search and found one for you. Florida is always a key word when searching for anything stupid but it's not alone. The gun nuts are beating us in state after state.


    by ocean-kat on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 4:43pm

    The link you provided seems to contradict your assertions because even under the old law in Florida both incidents we're discussing would have been 'reckless' discharge of firearms and illegal. The new law proposed there will make residential gun ranges illegal even though they are not reckless but could be dangerous.

    It appears there wasn't even a problem with residential firing ranges in Florida and the one residential gun range mentioned was set up by a gun control nut to advance more gun control laws that address nonexistent problems but make the rubes who support this nonsense feel more arrogant and secure.


    by Peter (not verified) on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 5:52pm

    We can take satisfaction, it would appear that in this case the effort was successful.

     

    I'm feeling more secure already, and its been years since I was in the Keys.

    Your unsupported assertion that no problems attendant upon people doing target practice in areas zoned for density less than one dwelling per acre density is, like your identity, unverified.

     

    It simply does not appear to be addressed in this story.


    by jollyroger on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 7:19pm

    You don't read much and don't follow many stories. Varrieur made that claim after shamed by the national media and Colbert. Before that his story was different. This is only one of at least a dozen similar stories I've read on this issue over the last few years. The NRA and ALEC designed legislation fpr states to stop cities from regulating guns has passed in several states. I'm not real great as selecting keywords and doing searches and I don't have time to find you links to stories you should have read if you're going to comment on these issues. Believe what you want, pontificating from a position of ignorance is your forte anyway.


    by ocean-kat on Tue, 02/23/2016 - 8:36pm

    I  think you don't want to admit how gun control nuts have to create dramas such as this to further the Cause and appear to be earning the Bloomberg money they get to fund their activism. This isn't the first incident and will probably be the new meme used to keep the 'problems' in the news.

    This fable reminds me of one of those Master Card commercials,  gun nut buys supplies and gun for his backyard shooting range, $500 on his MC. Few people seem to notice or care locally so gun nut contacts faux conservative celebrity entertainer to publicize this gun right, no charge. Adverse publicity shames local lawmakers on national TV resulting in new law to protect the helpless victims of gun rights,  Priceless!

    Gun nut comes out of the closet to proclaim he was an undercover gun control nut bravely infiltrating the Florida gun culture,  Double Priceless


    by Peter (not verified) on Wed, 02/24/2016 - 10:45am

    You appear to be our " go-to nut" now that Resistance has gone ( no doubt) to his reward, so let me avail myself of the opportunity to educate myself.

    1. Backyard ranges aside, where are you on the practice described of firing at the sky out your back door?

     

    2 Ought gun owners be subject to confiscation under the standard enunciated in the California law?

     

    3.Should Dalton have had his gun confiscated?


    by jollyroger on Wed, 02/24/2016 - 11:34am

    I think I have been very clear that any reckless/dangerous misuse of guns should be grounds for confiscation and prosecution. I also think it is the responsibility/duty of witnesses to these illegal misuses of guns to either confront or report these violators of other peoples safety.


    by Peter (not verified) on Wed, 02/24/2016 - 12:27pm

    Well, thank you, Jesus! Edit to add, dunno about the " confront" part, unless you feel lucky...

    by jollyroger on Wed, 02/24/2016 - 12:43pm

    I wasn't referring to a Dirty Harry confrontation, a neighborly talk when the problem person is not armed or too drunk to reason with could be effective and if it isn't you call the Pigs.

    I'm probably expecting too much from people who have been and are being conditioned to depend on authorities for their safety, which is not their agenda, and who are willing to give up their right and responsibility to defend themselves, their families and neighborhood. This defense doesn't have to depend on guns, just the will to confront problems directly before turning to and submitting to often deadly authority figures.


    by Peter (not verified) on Wed, 02/24/2016 - 2:56pm

    Cedric Ford musta' thought that blasting while rolling looked like too much fun not to emulate.

     

    Of course, Dalton ( still alive) blasted and rolled while WHITE.

     

    Ford's (dead) blasted and rolled while BLACK..

     

    They were, nonetheless, brothers under the skin.

    they both loved shooting so much, they would shoot at nothing


    by jollyroger on Thu, 02/25/2016 - 10:19pm