demanding to know why some families have not been notified; fomenting anger over the "gap"; anger that the shooter has not been identified.

While there is mention of opportunistic supporters of gun control, there is "reassurance" that the SECOND AMMENDMENT 'RIGHTS' are not up for discussion with the usual pablum that if any of the victims had been armed "perhaps" the shooter would have been taken out ...

This country lost its heart a while back ... I live in Colorado, knew people who had kids whose older siblings were at Columbine ... the Columbine aftermath of viciously blaming the parents for the bad acts of their 16-17 year old (suicidal) "children" was awful .... maybe I'm just cursed with a long memory ... but what I'm hearing tonight on TV really chills me, particularly the degree to which the media appears to be SETTING THE AGENDA, DEFINING THE CONTROVERSY ...

Living with uncertainty is part of TOLERANCE, part WISDOM, but mostly ACCEPTANCE OF REALITY ... there's stuff we will NEVER KNOW...

Like I said, what I'm hearing -- the blaming, the second-guessing, the "pointed" questions -- is chilling and, imho, pointlessly cynical/skeptical and ultimately damaging for the survivors and those whose grieving has just begun.

Sound too much like hate-mongering to me. I'm hating this.

Are you aware that owning a gun makes you a prime burglary subject? ... The ears of anyone wanting something easily stolen, portable, and easily converted to a good lump of cash will perk up when ANYONE mentions your gun(s).

Now, where I live guns are apparently considered collectable and it is the very fungable nature of their value that encourages poorly secured "gun collections" and enthusiasm for gun shows and absolute hatred of gun controls ...

A person with 2-3 or more unlicensed guns acquired over the years from various people (repayment of debts, gifts, inheritances, etc.) will lose a very real "asset" if/when we ever become serious about gun control, which imho will be never.

So, add the costs and inconvenience of a genuine hard mounted gun safe to your shopping list. To buy a gun simply out of "appreciation of the aesthetics and/or mechanics" seems about as likely as buying Playboy or Hustler for the articles, possible but not likely.

Personally, I think they are an invitation to act RASHLY and I live in a region where most people have guns -- to scare away bears and people -- However, I suspect most are actually put to use most often to murder a spouse and/or suicide. (fwiw, as far as I can tell carbon monoxide from car tail pipes and hanging vastly outnumber guns for suicide in these parts). Personally, I wouldn't have one in the house. Pots and pans scare away my bears just fine.

still lots we don't know, may never know.

My condolences to his parents as well ... there seem to be a few indicators this was not a Jekell-Hyde thing ... the Chicago Sun article (linked within Salon story) indicates recent erratic (and probably "actionable") behavior

Plenty of guilt to go around ... but I, for one, refuse to live my life in "lock down" or in fear of "the next time" ... gotta wonder how much the stereotype of the "invisible Asian" was used as an excuse by most to consider most of his behavior just "normal variation."

The young woman's boyfriend had been seen leaving the building right around the time of the killing -- he had, it turned out, dropped her off back at her residence. It appears, from what I've read most recently, both she and the RA were in the wrong place at the wrong time, random killings ...

Random killings are uncommon ... I would even guess that random killings at short/close range are even less common.

The "domestic" label refers to a "home", a closed system, not generally involving outsiders, it may be between man and women couples or same sex couples, it may involve children and parents and/or grandparents ...

Yes, traditionally police "hate" these disputes ... BUT NOT because they are trivial... but because they are unpredictable and thereby DANGEROUS, and repetitive, same actors, same complaints, often alcohol fueled.

The police in this case admit they made a mistake ... but I think it was an honest, understandable mistake ... random killings are rare and random close-range double killing are, I suspect, even rarer. (fwiw, I suspect early-morning killings are also unusual except when someone has lying in wait of a deliberate target, arriving at work or arriving home ...)

whatever. this knee-jerk response irritates the hell out of me. as others have said, you need only look at the cause-of-death statistics for young women to know "significant other" is first pick for perpetrator.

it's it just women like this who are to blame for police considering "domestic" calls a nuisance ...

yes, let's expand on those provisions to prosecute even when the victim "declines" (refuses to have her life put on trial) ...

yes, let's make it so that if you call the cops you'd better be prepared to throw the book at whomever is giving you grief.

That ought to cut those "nuisance" calls by 80-90% and get more of those "bad guys" locked up longer.

As for lock-downs, hell, most of the time with public incidents, cops can't even get witnesses to give statements ... don't wanna get involved. too often the only "volunteers" have dollar-signs in their eyes ...

even with shooting and killings, most folks figure it has nothing to do with them, so why should they be inconvenienced.

I'm sure you're all willing to do without libraries and what ever other paltry services your towns and counties provide so the cops have the resources (read manpower, generally on overtime) to lock down after each and every incident where the perpetrator is unknown or not yet in custody ... oh, yeah more cameras, and folks to watch the closed-circuit 24/7...

I can't wait.