• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Officer among 12 killed in mass shooting at bar in Thousand Oaks, California

Leftists tend to blame mental problems on military experience while ignoring a whole lot of other factors likely involved, like alcohol or drug abuse, coupled with consistent savage rebellion against righteousness defined by God.

Not just "leftists." The Right does the same thing. From the Democrat who once declared (in 2004?) that troops would return from Iraq as homicidal killers to today's conservatives who seek to excuse themselves from their once whole-hearted push for invasion and who now paint the troop as a victim of government tyranny...both sides have their heads up their asses.

Look at Hawkeye here. He is so focused on whining about wars he doesn't believe in that he is wiling to betray his own wife's PTSD to do it. According to him, this shooter simply disagreed with the war that he volunteered to fight in and his PTSD drove him to seek revenge on helpless civilians. He translates and imagines his own protest into this guy's action.

And what does God have to do with anything.
 
Last edited:
1) This was not PTSD. PTSD does not create homicidal murderers, who frequently visit the site of their intended mass shooting of civilians, who have nothing to do with anything. There was no snap in a fit of irrational anger here. There was no snap in regards to paranoia or personal defense. This was a suicidal head-case who premeditated his slaughter.

2) And there was nothing about "fraud" in regards to the war (Afghanistan) that he attended.

Sure Sarge, whatever you say.

PTSD is very real, very common, and can very much create homicidal murderers. When one murders for a living, as instructed by the government, it can really **** your mind up. There are numerous examples of veterans going "postal", pardon the play on words. If you are not aware of that during the last 15 years it's only because you don't want to be aware of it.

The entire GWOT was brought under fraud, including our most expensive fiasco in Afghanistan. If you don't understand that, it's only because you don't want to understand it.
 
Former students in his high school have stated that the shooter was aggressive and anti-social before he ever joined the Marines. My guess is that serving in Iraq did not lead to him committing mass murder.

Maybe not, but it likely was a very large factor in the complex equation that runs his mind.

Are you suggesting that PTSD is a fantasy?
 
Sure Sarge, whatever you say.

PTSD is very real....

Yes, PTSD is very real. It is even more real for those of us who have it and have to abide fools who wish to attribute PTSD to everything that a Vet says or does for the rest of his life.

The fact that he may have had undiagnosed PTSD is not why he decided to premeditate a massacre. This was not PTSD.

The entire GWOT was brought under fraud, including our most expensive fiasco in Afghanistan. If you don't understand that, it's only because you don't want to understand it.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with any of this. He enlisted in August of 2008. This was seven years after we invaded Afghanistan and five years after we invaded Iraq. Yet, enlist he did. This means that he knew exactly what he wanted to do and he enlisted in the proper Branch to do it. You people don't get to pretend that he was upset because he had to go to a war that he didn;t want to go to, and now American civilians paid the price.

Trying to spin this massacre into something that helps you complain about wars that you don't agree with will not work. And it definitely won't work for a conservative, who was the driving force into Iraq and spent almost the entirety of Bush's years blindly supporting bad decisions in both campaigns. Like I told Hawkeye10, your argument is about fifteen years too late.
 
Yes, actual professionals who deal with cases of PTSD, who have declared that this was not PTSD. You were given links.



Funny, since after I declared to another Vet that using PTSD as an excuse angers me, it was you who asked me to quantify that in Post #681. And after I quantified my declaration with the facts of the matter and with the argument (um..."other stuff") it was you who dismissed it outright, and called me arrogant for having an answer, so that you could cling to select professionals who want to flirt with the idea of PTSD.

The reason I gave you Sangin as a very likely battle site for him, which correspond to his deploy dates (aside from any smaller skirmishes in the Province), was to show you that although there is a basis for PTSD, his calculated and premeditated act seven years later was not PTSD. So don't sit there and pretend that you have read any of this anywhere else. You didn't even know that he had frequented the bar. You have not read of any battles or locations in Afghanistan that he was most probably at. And only after I validated why this was not PTSD, you chose not to care about the answer you asked for.

Don't confuse my ego, for having a clue, as opposed to your demonstrated argumentative nature.

I dismissed YOU outright, based on your words and delivery, like some arrogant expert. Your credibility went out the window, not to mention that being in the service does NOT make you an expert on PTSD.

I dont discount much of your information...it's not like it ONLY came from you. Please...I read, I have been reading, and following this story. You kept going on and on with assumptions you made about my opinion. It was annoying. You are still annoying and if I feel like I've been annoyed too much, I'll just ignore you. But your acting like a victim here is a bit much and I felt like responding.
 
If you turn up one day at that restaurant to perform a massacre, despite the town having many other restaurants to choose from, the common sense will prevail. You will have chosen that restaurant, because you know it's entryway, it's exits, and floor layout. You will have known it's crowd. You will have known it's security personnel and measures. You will have become familiar with it. Here, you wish to pretend that this trained Marine wasn't thinking of these things when he decided to murder? He developed a plan based on his familiarity, posted a message of his intent, and executed his plan. Have you ever heard of BAMCIS, the six troop leading steps? Well, every single Marine has:

Begin the Planning
Arrange for Recon
Make Reconnaissance
Complete the Plan
Issue the Order
Supervise


It doesn't take a genius to see how his conduct fit neatly into this. Oh but...irresponsible professionals say "PTSD." What he did was not PTSD.

Dont move the goalposts. You were shown he frequented that place as a patron who was perceived to 'belong' and enjoy himself.

You started out calling it 'scouting.' Now you are bobbing and weaving to try and justify it...with "military man babble." Sorry, it's as simple as what I just wrote right above.

Picking a place you are familiar with is not = to 'scouting.'

Just own it and move on.
 
We're mincing words? Scouting can only mean just a gathering of information, which he had done for years. The word is not important.

And yet you created several posts to nit-pick over exactly that.

Thank you.
 
Any truth to the matter that the four off duty cops in the bar were not allowed to carry inside that place?
 
Unless the masses are familiar with Cruikshank, Presser, Miller, Heller, McDonald, Caetano, NFA 1934, GCA 1968, FOPA 1986, Brady Act, 1994 AWB, Lautenberg and the actual statistics on gun violence, then yes, they are too ignorant to have an informed opinion on gun control.



Some gun control measures are not unconstitutional. They still need to be effective, enforceable and would be enforced. Does the government desire to protect its citizens override the rides of the citizens.

Are you familiar with Castle Rock v Gonzales?

People don't have to be familiar with any of your gun cases. Sixty-eight percent of Americans want more gun control. Those who DO NOT WANT MORE GUN CONTROL are in an ever-decreasing minority. It is the Government's function to protect the safety and security of its citizens. You are all reading way to much into Amendment 2. The Government can act with any gun control measure they feel would protect it's citizens. And a sensible Supreme Court will not act differently, if it jeopardizes citizen's safety.

Warren_e_burger_photo.jpeg

A fraud on the American public.” That’s how former Chief Justice Warren Burger described the idea that the Second Amendment gives an unfettered individual right to a gun. When he spoke these words to PBS in 1990, the rock-ribbed conservative appointed by Richard Nixon was expressing the longtime consensus of historians and judges across the political spectrum.
 
No, I am not saying that. Must one have PTSD to go on shooting rampages?

Thanks for the clarification. As to your question, an accurate answer to that would take long discussion. I do not know if all those who have gone on shooting rampages, if all those who have "gone postal" suffered PTSD. Acting crazy comes in many colors.
 
Yes, PTSD is very real. It is even more real for those of us who have it and have to abide fools who wish to attribute PTSD to everything that a Vet says or does for the rest of his life.

The fact that he may have had undiagnosed PTSD is not why he decided to premeditate a massacre. This was not PTSD.



Which has absolutely nothing to do with any of this. He enlisted in August of 2008. This was seven years after we invaded Afghanistan and five years after we invaded Iraq. Yet, enlist he did. This means that he knew exactly what he wanted to do and he enlisted in the proper Branch to do it. You people don't get to pretend that he was upset because he had to go to a war that he didn;t want to go to, and now American civilians paid the price.

Trying to spin this massacre into something that helps you complain about wars that you don't agree with will not work. And it definitely won't work for a conservative, who was the driving force into Iraq and spent almost the entirety of Bush's years blindly supporting bad decisions in both campaigns. Like I told Hawkeye10, your argument is about fifteen years too late.

Good points all Sarge, and I won't disagree with much at all.

That said Doctor, you have not made the case that this was not PTSD manifesting. Perhaps you could say the case that it was PTSD manifest has not been made either, but it seems that if we must, if we are even able to assign motives to a dead man, PTSD would be much more likely than whatever you may wish to assign.

It's entirely possible this guy was a psychopathic killer before he enlisted and the military shrinks just missed the signs and let him enlist anyway. Possible, but not proved.

It's more likely his time sitting behind vehicle mounted machine guns shooting up civilians had some long term effect on his behavior, and it all came home in that bar.
 
Good points all Sarge, and I won't disagree with much at all.

That said Doctor, you have not made the case that this was not PTSD manifesting. Perhaps you could say the case that it was PTSD manifest has not been made either, but it seems that if we must, if we are even able to assign motives to a dead man, PTSD would be much more likely than whatever you may wish to assign.

It's entirely possible this guy was a psychopathic killer before he enlisted and the military shrinks just missed the signs and let him enlist anyway. Possible, but not proved.

It's more likely his time sitting behind vehicle mounted machine guns shooting up civilians had some long term effect on his behavior, and it all came home in that bar.

Oh, I have absolutely made the case, as has plenty of actual professionals (links already provided) who work with PTSD.

First to the event...

1) He planned this at some point, which means that his desire to do it was enduring. It cannot be the result of a "trigger" or a momentary lapse into a "dream state" as others here appear to be holding out for.

2) He targeted a specific location, because after being a regular for years, that location was very familiar. He knew the layout and the security.

3) He knew to target the bouncer first, which means that he calculated his priority in targets. The bartender was also among the first specifically targeted.

4) He knew that Wednesday would provide him with many targets, because the bar had planned to host a student line-dancing night in which some 200 people attended.

This was not PTSD...

1) According to his High School track coach, he assaulted her and she declared that he had a propensity to violence before he ever joined the Marine Corps.

2) If he was in combat, which is why I offered up to 'Lursa' his most probable location and its violence during his tour in Afghanistan (November 2010 - June 2011), the professionals did not recognize PTSD upon his military exit in 2013. That being stated, the Marines who served with him, declared that they saw little combat.

3) He went from being a married man and an Active Duty Marine to being divorced and voluntarily Honorably Discharged in 2013 to live with his mother. For years, his neighbors could hear "frequent, aggressive shouting" between Long and his mother. This year was especially vicious.

4) Earlier this year, police mental health professionals who responded to one of these domestic issues, saw no PTSD to be concerned about.

5) If he did have undiagnosed PTSD, then his symptoms would have involved grief, depression, anxiety, paranoia, and anger. Not homicidal tendencies to plan and commit mass murder upon American civilians who had nothing to do with anything.

6) He was clear enough in his Facebook message that he shrugged at being insane and mocked the American population for its forecasted "hopes and prayers" and how people actually "wonder why these keep happening." This is not a message of war protest or political rage. Again, he planned this against dancing students at a bar that he frequented....not a mosque full of the "enemy."


* If PTSD was a factor here, he would have lost it in a fit of rage, murdered his mother, then stuck his weapon in his mouth and pulled the trigger. This was obviously just an angry, self-wallowing basement dweller who had nothing really to live for and simply wanted to hurt innocent people that had absolutely nothing to do with him. But the very first thing that even the President of the United States did was connect "Vet" to "PTSD" and encourage the stigma and confusion of what PTSD is to the masses. From this, people right here on this thread have taken this quick and easy answer even further and declared that he did it in order to protest a war in which he was a hapless victim of, after he volunteered for it.

If he did have undiagnosed PTSD, it would not have driven him to plan and execute a mass murder seven years after his Afghanistan tour. We have a history of Vietnam Vets living in the streets and Afghanistan/Iraq Vets coping and dealing with PTSD because Vietnam Vets insist that we get help in order to deal with our depressions, heightened anxieties, irritating paranoia, and almost complete lack of patience for everyday, mundane things. By trying to argue that this nutcase was John Rambo and that this is just what PTSD does, it merely pushes Vets to further avoid the discussion. I actually hate the term.
 
Oh, I have absolutely made the case, as has plenty of actual professionals (links already provided) who work with PTSD.

First to the event...

1) He planned this at some point, which means that his desire to do it was enduring. It cannot be the result of a "trigger" or a momentary lapse into a "dream state" as others here appear to be holding out for.

2) He targeted a specific location, because after being a regular for years, that location was very familiar. He knew the layout and the security.

3) He knew to target the bouncer first, which means that he calculated his priority in targets. The bartender was also among the first specifically targeted.

4) He knew that Wednesday would provide him with many targets, because the bar had planned to host a student line-dancing night in which some 200 people attended.

This was not PTSD...

1) According to his High School track coach, he assaulted her and she declared that he had a propensity to violence before he ever joined the Marine Corps.

2) If he was in combat, which is why I offered up to 'Lursa' his most probable location and its violence during his tour in Afghanistan (November 2010 - June 2011), the professionals did not recognize PTSD upon his military exit in 2013. That being stated, the Marines who served with him, declared that they saw little combat.

3) He went from being a married man and an Active Duty Marine to being divorced and voluntarily Honorably Discharged in 2013 to live with his mother. For years, his neighbors could hear "frequent, aggressive shouting" between Long and his mother. This year was especially vicious.

4) Earlier this year, police mental health professionals who responded to one of these domestic issues, saw no PTSD to be concerned about.

5) If he did have undiagnosed PTSD, then his symptoms would have involved grief, depression, anxiety, paranoia, and anger. Not homicidal tendencies to plan and commit mass murder upon American civilians who had nothing to do with anything.

6) He was clear enough in his Facebook message that he shrugged at being insane and mocked the American population for its forecasted "hopes and prayers" and how people actually "wonder why these keep happening." This is not a message of war protest or political rage. Again, he planned this against dancing students at a bar that he frequented....not a mosque full of the "enemy."


* If PTSD was a factor here, he would have lost it in a fit of rage, murdered his mother, then stuck his weapon in his mouth and pulled the trigger. This was obviously just an angry, self-wallowing basement dweller who had nothing really to live for and simply wanted to hurt innocent people that had absolutely nothing to do with him. But the very first thing that even the President of the United States did was connect "Vet" to "PTSD" and encourage the stigma and confusion of what PTSD is to the masses. From this, people right here on this thread have taken this quick and easy answer even further and declared that he did it in order to protest a war in which he was a hapless victim of, after he volunteered for it.

If he did have undiagnosed PTSD, it would not have driven him to plan and execute a mass murder seven years after his Afghanistan tour. We have a history of Vietnam Vets living in the streets and Afghanistan/Iraq Vets coping and dealing with PTSD because Vietnam Vets insist that we get help in order to deal with our depressions, heightened anxieties, irritating paranoia, and almost complete lack of patience for everyday, mundane things. By trying to argue that this nutcase was John Rambo and that this is just what PTSD does, it merely pushes Vets to further avoid the discussion. I actually hate the term.

One the other hand him being pissed at this society for what we did to him, for this crap life that he wants to/needs to leave, and wanting to take out a few of us on the way out so that we maybe wise up and not be so frivolous with the lives of soldiers that we do something like Iraq and the lives of men that we blame them for damn near everything explains everything.
 
One the other hand him being pissed at this society for what we did to him, for this crap life that he wants to/needs to leave, and wanting to take out a few of us on the way out so that we maybe wise up and not be so frivolous with the lives of soldiers that we do something like Iraq and the lives of men that we blame them for damn near everything explains everything.

No, it absolutely does not explain a thing. This is just you pushing your own anti-war protest onto his action:

1) He volunteered, not only during a time of widespread warfare, but many, many years after "we" invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. He was eleven years old when Afghanistan was invaded; and he was thirteen years old when Iraq was invaded. "We" did nothing to him.

2) For those who did enlist prior to 9/11 and prior to the Iraq invasion, and of whom some Army soldiers publicly protested their deployment, their claims of being a victim of government frivolous decision making did not produce an individual who decided to arbitrarily take it out on American civilians who had nothing to do with anything in a mass shooting.


***

1) A second high school coach has declared that he was volatile, intimidating, sadistic, and threw violent temper tantrums towards teachers when he didn't like their decisions. She witnessed him assault a fellow coach and use his finger to simulate shooting. Repeated complaints to school administrators about his behavior failed to prompt any discipline.

2) When asked why he wanted to join the Marines [of all the Branches, mind you], he declared that he wanted to be in the Marines because he "wanted to go fight and...kill for our country." This is why he did not enlist in the Air Force or the Navy and chose the Branch that would all-but guarantee him a place in the sand.

3) He received two administrative disciplinary actions while in the Marines for shoplifting before his deployment to Afghanistan in 2010-2011.

4) He had a history of fighting with his mother. And when he moved back in with his mother after his military Honorable Discharge in 2013, the neighbors constantly heard violent shouting and profanity towards his mother for years. People want to say it was worse after his military phase, which alludes to the PTSD default, but this also follows a phase in his life where he was encouraged to use his aggression against an enemy, a divorce, and a realization that he went on to be largely nothing in his mother's house. He was known to kick holes in the walls. This merely demonstrates a long history of violent and sadistic tantrums, which even High School teachers have declared that he had before enlisting.

This was not PTSD and it certainly wasn't because somebody forced him to go to war. Like I told you, your argument is about fifteen years too late and it is misdirected. The guy was just a mental-case and a douche. Wanting it to be about PTSD or a protest of war is only about trying to "explain everything." In the meantime, people with PTSD are just being encouraged to clam up even more because of an already exaggerated stigma that brands them as ticking time bombs who may one day tear down society because he is now just a homicidal maniac who finds pleasure in it.
 
Oh, I have absolutely made the case, as has plenty of actual professionals (links already provided) who work with PTSD.

First to the event...

1) He planned this at some point, which means that his desire to do it was enduring. It cannot be the result of a "trigger" or a momentary lapse into a "dream state" as others here appear to be holding out for.

2) He targeted a specific location, because after being a regular for years, that location was very familiar. He knew the layout and the security.

3) He knew to target the bouncer first, which means that he calculated his priority in targets. The bartender was also among the first specifically targeted.

4) He knew that Wednesday would provide him with many targets, because the bar had planned to host a student line-dancing night in which some 200 people attended.

This was not PTSD...

1) According to his High School track coach, he assaulted her and she declared that he had a propensity to violence before he ever joined the Marine Corps.

2) If he was in combat, which is why I offered up to 'Lursa' his most probable location and its violence during his tour in Afghanistan (November 2010 - June 2011), the professionals did not recognize PTSD upon his military exit in 2013. That being stated, the Marines who served with him, declared that they saw little combat.

3) He went from being a married man and an Active Duty Marine to being divorced and voluntarily Honorably Discharged in 2013 to live with his mother. For years, his neighbors could hear "frequent, aggressive shouting" between Long and his mother. This year was especially vicious.

4) Earlier this year, police mental health professionals who responded to one of these domestic issues, saw no PTSD to be concerned about.

5) If he did have undiagnosed PTSD, then his symptoms would have involved grief, depression, anxiety, paranoia, and anger. Not homicidal tendencies to plan and commit mass murder upon American civilians who had nothing to do with anything.

6) He was clear enough in his Facebook message that he shrugged at being insane and mocked the American population for its forecasted "hopes and prayers" and how people actually "wonder why these keep happening." This is not a message of war protest or political rage. Again, he planned this against dancing students at a bar that he frequented....not a mosque full of the "enemy."


* If PTSD was a factor here, he would have lost it in a fit of rage, murdered his mother, then stuck his weapon in his mouth and pulled the trigger. This was obviously just an angry, self-wallowing basement dweller who had nothing really to live for and simply wanted to hurt innocent people that had absolutely nothing to do with him. But the very first thing that even the President of the United States did was connect "Vet" to "PTSD" and encourage the stigma and confusion of what PTSD is to the masses. From this, people right here on this thread have taken this quick and easy answer even further and declared that he did it in order to protest a war in which he was a hapless victim of, after he volunteered for it.

If he did have undiagnosed PTSD, it would not have driven him to plan and execute a mass murder seven years after his Afghanistan tour. We have a history of Vietnam Vets living in the streets and Afghanistan/Iraq Vets coping and dealing with PTSD because Vietnam Vets insist that we get help in order to deal with our depressions, heightened anxieties, irritating paranoia, and almost complete lack of patience for everyday, mundane things. By trying to argue that this nutcase was John Rambo and that this is just what PTSD does, it merely pushes Vets to further avoid the discussion. I actually hate the term.

Not persuasive Sarge, but who knows, maybe you're right.

I have an old friend who was the only survivor in his platoon in a fire fight back in RVN. He's been with VA ever since for his medical care. Yes, he does have PTSD, but he has never shot anybody since. He works outside just to keep what bit of sanity is left.

So maybe the guy in CA had PTSD, maybe he didn't. Does it really matter at this point? Clearly he was sick. If you want to think his tour as a gunner had no effect on his behavior, that is certainly your prerogative.
 
Back
Top Bottom