BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK

Subject: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Senoufou
Date: 14 Aug 21 - 07:59 AM

There has been much shock and disgust at the recent murder of five people by a crazed gunman in Plymouth. He killed his own mother, a random man and his 3yr old little girl, a man walking his dog and a woman outside a hair salon. He then shot himself.
Apparently the Police had handed back to him his rifle after having confiscated it in December. He had completed an anger management course (???)
My questions are, should we regard such people as mentally ill or just basically wicked? Should the Police have allowed him to have his gun back? Should there be a much stricter system in operation about who owns a gun and who is allowed to have the Licence?
This tragedy has caused a deluge of comments in the Press and online.
I found it very sad and upsetting.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Aug 21 - 08:47 AM

Well I don't think that by any stretch of the imagination a man who can point a gun at a little girl and pull the trigger can be regarded as mentally well. I don't know what the rules are about who can have what type of gun or licence, but there should and will be a critical enquiry as to why he got his licence back. Other than that, we don't get these horrid incidents very often in this country and I'm unsure as to whether I should regard this as a dreadful one-off.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Raggytash
Date: 14 Aug 21 - 09:24 AM

Well lets see, Hungerford, Dunblane, and Cumbria and yesterday Plymouth.

That in my book is four too many.

There is absolutely no need for the average man in the street to own a gun, I do realise in a very small number of occuaptions a gun/rifle my be required, for the rest of us it is merely vanity to have a gun.

I am speaking as a former member of a rifle range.

We can see from the all too often shootings in the USA the devastation that guns and rifles create.

The quite simple solution, to most of these events, is to ban guns in private ownership.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Donuel
Date: 14 Aug 21 - 09:38 AM

For some people empathy free vanity is a very important reason.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Senoufou
Date: 14 Aug 21 - 11:46 AM

I agree that there can be no reason for anyone here to own a gun.
In the past, farmers would shoot crows, pigeons and other crop-munching birds with a rifle. Nowadays they use 'bangers' (a loudspeaker thing which can be set to go BANG at a frequency one chooses) which are effective at moving a flock of birds off the fields.
I personally despise these consortiums of wealthy businessmen/enthusiasts that go grouse shooting (the season started on August 12th - the 'Glorious Twelfth') slaughtering 'game birds' by the hundred. Horrible, but I daresay they adore the activity - it's seen as a 'sport'!.
However, if one is feeling murderous, one can knife people to death (knife crime is increasing frighteningly among young people in the big cities)
I'm mainly interested in the psychology behind all this. And at what point does one decide a perpetrator is mentally ill or just wicked and deserving of a life-sentence?
Dunblane was apparently the result of Thomas Hamilton's feeling of exclusion and rejection (!!)
I suppose I could boil all this down to a simple "What makes people kill?"

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Mrrzy
Date: 14 Aug 21 - 01:11 PM

Welcome to America, UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 14 Aug 21 - 01:49 PM

”There is absolutely no need for the average man in the street to own a gun, I do realise in a very small number of occuaptions a gun/rifle my be required, for the rest of us it is merely vanity to have a gun.”

There it is - in a nutshell, the absolute truth. Guns have one purpose, and one purpose only - to kill. Anyone who wants to privately own a gun is either mentally deficient or a criminal. Ban the lot of ‘em, nobody - that’s NOBODY - ‘needs’ a gun.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Aug 21 - 02:39 PM

Well I have resided in the country for half of my rather long life. I have never used or owned a gun and wouldn't know how to hold one. But there's a chap near us who is licenced to cull deer, which are abundant and a menace to agriculture round here. I don't demur. And if you catch live rabbits, squirrels or rats, you must dispatch them by a blow to the head or by shooting them. You are not permitted to release them in the wild or drown them. I'm scratching my head here as to how you kill a squirrel in a live trap by hitting it on the head...

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: meself
Date: 14 Aug 21 - 02:46 PM

What does "just basically wicked" mean? As opposed to, oh - "mentally ill"?

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 14 Aug 21 - 03:50 PM

Raggytash - 4 mass shootings in 20, 30 years - that would be three days' worth in USA where carrying guns saves lives!

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 14 Aug 21 - 04:20 PM

I should qualify my post of 01:49 PM today. When I said ‘nobody’, I should have excluded those who use firearms in a professional scenario! Including farmers, gamekeepers, police officers, et al, and whose guns are a necessary part of their livelihoods.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Senoufou
Date: 14 Aug 21 - 04:26 PM

meself, I agree with your question - what is the psychological difference between insane and wicked?
I think Steve is right when he says anyone who randomly shoots a tiny little girl in the street must surely be mentally ill, by definition!
Guns are for killing, nothing else. They are not toys or objects to impress your mates. They kill.
I suppose terrorism using bombs is even worse, as many can be killed at once.
I have actually never even seen a gun, let alone touched or held one. My lovely neighbour next door (veterinary nurse) has had field-training in dispatching very sick horses/large farm animals an using a gun, but that's for humanitarian reasons.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: leeneia
Date: 17 Aug 21 - 09:50 AM

It doesn't matter whether a murderous person uses a gun, knife, bomb, fire, poison, or drives a vehicle into a crowd. We need to figure out why the murderer felt such anger and hate.

Since such attacks often end in suicide, the murderer isn't even feeling a normal animal's drive to survive. Something is wrong.

Child abuse, drug abuse, problem drinking, gang membership, mental illness and Internet propagandizing come to mind. It probably takes a combination of more than one of the above. There could be other factors nobody's thought about.

I read in a book on law enforcement that alcohol is involved in 97% of serious crime.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Mr Red
Date: 18 Aug 21 - 02:34 AM

Presumably the reason he got his gun back was because there was a clause on his requirement to hold a licence that his licence was withheld until he completed his anger management course. The police would be powerless in the face of that, if he played the system.

What was the wording of conditions of his licence? And what was his original misdemeanour? Why do we issue gun licences to people who just want a gun? Culling deer** is one reason, and even that is contentious.

All this is hindsight. Life ain't binary - it is messy.

** it is necessary, if you want to ban hunting with dogs - I am told.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: DaveRo
Date: 18 Aug 21 - 02:51 AM

It was a shotgun, BTW, not a rifle. Licence conditions are less strict I think.

It's unlikely he could afford to shoot game, so he probably used it to shoot clays (which were called 'clay pigeons' when I was a child). Is this what is called 'skeet in the US? My children had a game called that on the Atari ST.

The police would certainly not have returned it if they had known more about him. Hindsight...

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Senoufou
Date: 18 Aug 21 - 03:36 AM

Ah sorry DaveRo, my mistake - but I wouldn't know the difference between a shotgun and a rifle.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Rain Dog
Date: 18 Aug 21 - 04:54 AM

We will have to wait for the full details to see why he was allowed to have the gun back.

I found this website which has a lot of information on obtaining certificate.

Shooting UK

I was surprised by some of the information.

"There is no lower age limit for having a shotgun certificate and you sometimes hear of people "AS YOUNG AS NINE" getting one. To some extent it depends on the physique and maturity of the person concerned. Anyone under the age of 15 must be supervised by a person aged at least 21. Those under 18 must get a parent or guardian to tick the appropriate boxes, sign, print their name and date the application.

There is no legal requirement for the supervisor to have a shotgun certificate

You are not allowed to buy or hire a shotgun or ammunition until you are 18.

You may be given a shotgun when you are 15 but there is no lower age limit at which a person may be lent a shotgun."

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: leeneia
Date: 19 Aug 21 - 09:11 AM

So much attention given to one man with a gun...

"In the year ending March 2020, there were around 46,000 (selected) offences involving a knife or sharp instrument in England and Wales."

That's from the House of Commons Library. Our problem isn't weapons. Our problem is hate and anger.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 19 Aug 21 - 10:49 AM

"Our problem isn't weapons. Our problem is hate and anger."

Correction, Leeneia - our problem is hate and anger backed up by weapons.

IMHO, YMMV, yadda yadda.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: leeneia
Date: 23 Aug 21 - 11:29 AM

Here's information from a magazine I get called 'The Week.' It seems a reliable publication.

'An adherent of the misogynistic "incel" culture last week shot dead five people, including a 3-year-old girl, and wounded two others before turning his gun on himself....Jake Davison, 22, killed his mother with a pump-action shotgun and then went on a rampage, blasting victims at random...

Davison had his gun license revoked in December following an alleged assault, but it was restored last month after he attended management classes.

He was a frequent visitor to internet sites where incels - men who are involuntarily celibate because they can't get dates - rail against women. Davison posted online that was a "fat ugly virgin" who was "defeated" by life. He signed off his final YouTube video by declaring, "I am a terminator."'

===========
The world saw this "incel" idea a few years ago where a man killed others in Canada. I think it was Quebec or Ontario - somewhere in the east of the country.

In this narrative I see a weak mind preyed upon by toxic individuals using the power of the internet.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 23 Aug 21 - 11:32 AM

This idea of young men who can't convince women to have sex with them so they take it out on young women or people in general has been around for a while. California has seen a number of shootings in this category. It's a particularly nasty form of mental illness.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Donuel
Date: 23 Aug 21 - 12:02 PM

When a vain narcisistic person decides on suicide, which is a violent pathologic anger directed inwards, they often break the deal and decide to take others with them.

Suicide can be a healthy response but that is because the State made it illegal for medical care givers to administer treatment as painless as for your dog.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: leeneia
Date: 24 Aug 21 - 11:20 AM

Davison was 22 years old and "defeated by life." Something very wrong there.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Senoufou
Date: 24 Aug 21 - 01:24 PM

I see that now there are moves afoot to review the conditions for gun ownership, and the reissuing of a Licence after adverse behaviour etc. Not before time.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 24 Aug 21 - 03:03 PM

I'm 74 years old and life hasn't defeated me, yet.

Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Mr Red
Date: 26 Aug 21 - 01:47 PM

To paraphrase James McNeil Whistler to Oscar Wilde


Oh it will, Dave H, it will

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 27 Aug 21 - 04:20 AM

I don't doubt you are right Mr Red, I've been close a few times already.



Dave H

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: leeneia
Date: 27 Aug 21 - 09:59 AM

Good for you, Dave. I enjoy life too.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Rain Dog
Date: 07 Oct 21 - 03:44 AM

From the BBC.

This is an edited extract from the article. Full details on the link below.

"A member of police staff has been issued with a gross misconduct notice over their handling of Plymouth gunman Jake Davison's application for a shotgun certificate."

And

"A second person - a police officer - has received a misconduct notice."

And

"The IOPC is investigating how the apprentice crane operator was originally granted a shotgun certificate in 2017 by Devon and Cornwall Police.

The watchdog is also examining how Davison was handed back the weapon and certificate weeks before the shooting - having been seized after admitting the two assaults on youths in a park in September 2020.

Davison was placed on a voluntary intervention programme following the assaults - an alternative to being charged or cautioned.

His shotgun and licence were not seized for another three months until concerns were raised directly with the police by a member of staff working on the intervention programme.

In July, Davison was given back his shotgun, which he used for clay pigeon shooting, and his certificate.

The IOPC said it was investigating whether the police officer "shared information appropriately with the force Firearms and Explosives Licensing Department" regarding the violent offences, and whether they "took appropriate steps to seize the shotgun certificate, shotgun, and ammunition""


Plymouth shootings: Police worker faces misconduct proceedings

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Rain Dog
Date: 02 Mar 22 - 04:54 PM

From the BBC

Plymouth shooting: Ban pump-action weapons from homes, says MP

"The Labour MP for Keyham, where five people were killed in a mass shooting, is calling for pump-action weapons to be banned from homes.

Luke Pollard said the nation's gun laws needed to change to prevent another such tragedy.

He also said medical professionals should be asked to alert gun licensing authorities if they had concerns about a gun holder's mental health.

The MP introduced his Firearms and Hate Crime Bill to Parliament on Wednesday.

His proposals come over six months after Jake Davison carried out a six-minute shooting spree in Keyham, Plymouth before taking his own life."

And

"His bill would prohibit the keeping of pump-action firearms in the home - although there would be exemptions for farmers and pest controllers.

It would also place a duty on medical professionals to report any concerns around a gun holder's mental health to the gun licensing authorities so their suitability to hold a gun can be reviewed.

The MP said he did not see "any good reason" why someone would need to keep such weapons in their home.

"I want to rid our communities or these dangerous and unnecessary weapons," he told MPs.

Mr Pollard said that following the shooting "big hearts had prevailed" but now was the time for "cool heads" to change the country's laws.

The proposed legislation would also make misogyny a hate crime, which Mr Pollard said was a step towards tackling "the rotten cesspit of hate" online which taught young men "to channel their frustration into an insidious hatred for women".

His proposed law passed its first stage unopposed; however, as he is a backbench MP, his bill is unlikely to become law.

Following the shooting in Plymouth, the government said that from 1 November 2021, all firearms applications should be accompanied by a medical document signed by a practising doctor.

Applicants' social media, financial history and any domestic violence history would also be reviewed, the government said."

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Gallus Moll
Date: 02 Mar 22 - 06:48 PM

Steve - I spend a fortune on squirrel food for my resident Reds!!
Can't imagine why anyone would want to kill them - it is probably illegal anyway?
(I regularly rampage at folks who ignore the 20mph advisory speed limit on 'my' road, kill not only red squirrels but Roe deer, neither species have traffic awareness!!)

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Mar 22 - 07:39 PM

I meant grey squirrels only, Gallus. It isn't illegal to kill greys, though there are strict regulations. Grey squirrels, an unwelcome import from the New World, are a huge threat to our diminishing population of reds.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Mrrzy
Date: 02 Mar 22 - 10:03 PM

Why only ban the precise gun used?

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Jon Freeman
Date: 04 Mar 22 - 11:50 AM

I think there may be exceptions (eg. perhaps euthanising an injured animal) but this is the general situation in the UK.

Red squirrels are a protected species. It is illegal to kill them.

Grey squirrels are classed as a non-native invasive species and it is illegal to release a live one into the wild. They can’t for example be rescued when hurt and released when fit again. See here

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Rain Dog
Date: 21 Feb 23 - 09:11 AM

From The Guardian


Shooting groups reject call for firearms law change in England and Wales

"Organisations representing gun owners and the shooting industry have voiced their opposition to changes to the firearms laws demanded by victims’ families and police chiefs after the Plymouth shootings.

At the end of an inquest on Jake Davison’s five victims, bereaved relatives and senior police officers said they wanted the law in England and Wales changed to make shotguns subject to the same rules as rifles, arguing that they are just as deadly.

But there is alarm within the shooting community that rule changes could hit law-abiding shotgun-owners and the industry by forcing up the cost of certificates, and some fear it could push firearms ownership underground."

Last summer I was in the company of a number of gun owners. It made a change from the usual pub conversations.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Feb 23 - 09:47 AM

The existing laws should have caught this unhinged owner but they didn't so I dunno if tightening the law will help or hinder trapping such cases. I am also unsure of the purpose of the type of shotgun (pump action) he had. Why would anyone need one? The only time I have fired a shotgun was at a clay pigeon shoot and a standard twin barrelled one was perfectly adequate. It would be the same for game shooting.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: MaJoC the Filk
Date: 21 Feb 23 - 10:43 AM

> The existing laws should have caught this unhinged owner but they
> didn't so I dunno if tightening the law will help or hinder trapping
> such cases.

The more complicated a set of laws becomes, the more difficult it becomes to enforce (eg: tax laws). The standard legislative MO is to address a shortcoming by adding yet another layer of duct tape; joy ensues in the halls of the lawyers.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Rain Dog
Date: 21 Feb 23 - 10:55 AM

It does appear that he should not have been allowed to have a gun under the existing laws. We will await further clarification on that matter.

There is little point in passing any laws if you are not going to enforce them.

Subject: RE: BS: Murderer in Plymouth UK
From: Mr Red
Date: 21 Feb 23 - 02:30 PM

The existing laws should have caught this unhinged owner but they didn't so I dunno........

I do. In WW2, planes that returned with bullet holes had the holes mapped onto drawings and soon the planemakers armoured the places that did not show on planes that had survived.

The Moral is, defined where the weaknesses are and then strengthen those areas.

My analogy (not the conclusion) has one flaw, in context, "do we want the experience of multiple instances before analysing the results?"