By NH State Rep. Norm Silber
For about 40 years before becoming a permanent resident of Gilford, I lived and practiced law in the Miami area, so I have some significant familiarity with Florida law.
The recent Parkland school shooting has produced a lot of discussion about how and why it happened and how a similar event in the future could be prevented. However, much of the discussion and calls for “action” have missed many important facts, distinct from the emotions of the moment.
Although some may argue that law enforcement cannot do anything about someone until they become violent, that is simply not the case in Florida, which has a longstanding law called the “Baker Act,” which allows for the involuntary temporary confinement and evaluation of someone who is reasonably believed to have a potential to harm themselves or others.
This procedure is used with some degree of regularity and most law enforcement and EMT personnel in Florida are very familiar with it. So, the natural question is why was this not used with the Parkland shooter before he acted out his murderous intentions?
Would not his post on social media indicating his intention to become a school shooter fall into a precise category for which the Baker Act was designed? It also pays to ask why law enforcement and social media did not act against the shooter before he acted.
It is hard to believe that the FBI could not have obtained the shooter’s IP address, either from YouTube (where he posted) or via the NSA, which would have led them to his home address from which the postings were originated. Similarly, when the shooter legally purchased his weapons and filled out the federal ATF forms to apply for “clearance” to make his purchases, could not the FBI query the database of the ATF against the name revealed by the IP address to see if the poster was taking actual steps to carry out his murderous rage?
And how about the Broward Sheriff’s Office, which admits that it was called to the shooter’s home many times for disturbances? If the FBI had coordinated with them about the threats being made, the BSO could have taken steps under the Baker Act to take the shooter off the street, and it is not unusual for a Judge hearing a Baker Act matter to require the confiscation of all the weapons of a person determined to be potentially harmful to himself or others.
The FBI admits that it “dropped the ball” in this case. Really? Is that what happened? Remember this is the federal agency, once thought of as the premier law enforcement agency in our country, that ignored warnings from its agents in Arizona to the effect that it seemed strange that persons from Arab countries were taking flight lessons that involved training for takeoffs but no training for landings. So, I guess the terrorist attack at the World Trade Center towers in New York was just another case of having “dropped the ball!”
And how about YouTube and other social media sites? Stories have recently appeared that many social media sites have been censoring posts that they deem politically incorrect, especially if they do not comport with their left-leaning world view. I assume that their allocation of personnel to do those reviews and censoring makes them unable to review, note and act upon potentially deadly threatening posts. Like by calling the FBI?
Finally, there have arisen the usual calls for more gun control laws, but none short of total confiscation (which will not happen in or country as long as there is a Second Amendment) would have prevented the Parkland shooting. If no guns were available, persons with a desire to kill others will always find a way and a weapon, even if the weapon is not a gun.
So, examining other recent murderous rampages, I suggest the following: We should ban all motor vehicles because of all the people killed by drunk drivers and by terrorists driving into crowds (which the Parkland shooter could have done in front of this school in lieu of shooting, just like in Nice, France). We should also ban all sharp knives because of various people killed or maimed by knife attacks around the world. And we should also ban machetes since they seem to be the weapon of choice for the notorious MS-13 gang members from El Salvador who have illegally entered our country and preyed upon many of our people, including some of their own fellow countrymen.
The foregoing suggestions will lead to better health and safety for all of us. We will have to walk more, which is good for your health. We will have to cut sugar cane and brush, and do food prep, with rounded-tip baby scissors, but is that really too much to ask for in the name of public safety?
If those suggestions are unpalatable in a free country such as ours, should we not ask whether if the shooter had been taken into custody under the Baker Act and properly evaluated for his mental condition(s), could not the entire shooting incident have been prevented?
It is hard to believe that the FBI and the Broward Sheriff’s Office are unfamiliar with Florida’s Baker Act and how it can be used to protect innocent lives. If they had just used the tools they already possess, 17 people would not be dead.
Norman Silber
Member of the NH House of Representatives
Belknap County District 2- Gilford & Meredith
Member of The Florida Bar & the New Hampshire Bar
