The father of the shooter was interviewed on one of the local news programs. He stated that while he knew his son had problems he did not think he would turn violent. He went on to say that the family had been trying to get him help but could not get involuntary help without citing violence. He said they would not lie about that so nothing could be done. However it was also reported that there had been an instance of domestic violence. Conviction of that would, I believe, have removed his concealed carry license. But the woman (wife?) would not press charges. That would have also qualified him for involuntary treatment. For whatever reason, that decision not to prosecute was instrumental in the deaths of a bunch of people. The laws of unintended consequences strike again.
Re media news: They continue to focus on the gun. Have pointed out that they were all purchased legally and at least one was purchased at the same store where the DC sniper had stolen his rifle with pictures of big "GUNS" sign at the store (WTF does that have to do with anything).
In addition an anti-gun city council member lamented the fact that the state prevents them from solving their "gun problem". Seattle previously tried to ban guns in parks and some other areas - shot down by state supreme court because there is a low that says no local government can preempt state firearms regulations.
Comments by mayor when asked about that replied that his current task is fix things but that he was working with some organized anti-gun group to develop a plan.
There was, somewhere in the news, one rational statement by someone concerning the rash of "gun" problems. They said that the economy is likely to be a factor in the increases crime.
