Here we go again - another theatre shooting

WhatInThe said:
A lot of good all those licensing requirements did to stop that women from criminally/purposely plowing her "legal" car into those four women. Or stop all of the drunk drivers/driving; you frequently see stories of people with suspended licenses getting in a car and causing havoc. A criminal or someone acting criminally will find a way to do their deeds wether things or legal or not, licensed or not. This particular shooter was already denied a gun permit.
Click to expand...

Nice red herring you are trying to drag across the page but remember we are talking easy access to automatic weapons here not drunk drivers or any other of the many things trying to hurt or kill us.
 

Years ago I saw a hitchcock film about a woman in Europe who killed her husband. The constable investigating couldn't find the murder weapon (blunt force trauma). She fixed a leg of lamb roast she took from the freezer and offered the constable a invite to supper. Together, unbeknownst to the constable, they ate the murder weapon.
 
Horrible to say.... I really feel bad for the dead... the injured and their families.. However, like most.. I see not sense to it... nor do I see any remedy.. If Sandyhook didn't do anything in the way of sensible gun legislation.. Nothing will change.. this will happen over and over and over and over.. We will grieve these victims.. until the next set ..
 
It is all good to have folks register for gun ownership. But if this guy did not have a gun registered to him then how did he get one to use. That story has not been told yet. So nothing wrong with the registration. How did he get a .40 caliber pistol. From his family, from some street seller, just how. He apparently has had a long life of problems and mental situations. It was not the guns fault. It was the mental patient that had the problem.
 
It wasn't the guns fault Bob, but what if no handguns existed,no automatic rifles, only actual hunting equipment? Could it still happen, of course but at what rate?
 
WhatInThe said:
This particular shooter was already denied a gun permit.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that?

Houser — an Alabama native who was estranged from his family and living in a Lafayette motel at the time of the attack — had legally purchased the Hi-Point 40 caliber semi-automatic handgun used in the attack on Valentine's Day of this year, authorities said.
The sale, made at a Phoenix, Ala. pawn shop, was to a man whose relatives described as having a “volatile mental state” and "a history of mental health issues, i.e., manic depression and/or bi-polar disorder," in 2008 court paperwork.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...user-history-mental-illness-article-1.2303207
Click to expand...
 
I'm really tired of the debate... Let EVERY nut have a gun if they want one... More and more killings... It's a given.. So let's just all accept it.. thousands of innocent people will have to die because of the 2nd amendment.
 
But QuickSilver, think what would have happened without this amendment. America would have been invaded by foreign powers, like all of the countries that don't have this constitutional right - Canada, Australia, New Zealand, ...
 
I'm so sick of it all DW.... Let the killings continue... I'm tired of arguing about it.. Let EVERYONE and ANYONE have a gun.. and we can just keep score of the deaths.. We do have a population problem. This may help.
 
WhatInThe said:
Gun permit equals right to carry

http://wwlp.com/2015/07/24/louisiana-shooter-denied-pistol-permit-in-2006-had-several-legal-run-ins/

He had a criminal record and forced physciatric incarceration although some states a criminal record can be expunged. Not sure about that purchase yet because the much of the same criteria for right to carry is used on a purchase. Don't know wether it's hole in the law or something was missed.
Click to expand...

IMO the problem is that what is illegal in one state is legal in a nearby state, which makes all of your gun laws impotent. There needs to be a set of national regulations and a federal authority dealing with the problem.
 
QuickSilver said:
I'm so sick of it all DW.... Let the killings continue... I'm tired of arguing about it.. Let EVERYONE and ANYONE have a gun.. and we can just keep score of the deaths.. We do have a population problem. This may help.
Click to expand...

I hear your pain.

However, perhaps the next president will be able to break through. It might take a Republican president to do it, just as it took John Howard, a conservative politician, to do it over here. Just as only Nixon could go to China, perhaps only a right wing president will be able to convince people that gun regulation will not be the end of everyone's civil rights.
 
Warrigal, if you really think the US should change it's Constitution, then move here and do your best. The Constitution will take several years to force to a change, so plan on staying for a long time. Those countries you named are just being lucky.

Canada does have guns in their territories. One job I was interviewing for said I needed to carry a rifle for food and defense as my assignment was way up north somewhere. I was to fly in and out in an airplane and take in parts and supplies and take out what ever. I did not do that job. It was for the oil pipelines and exploration. I think Canada still has weapons allowed. Maybe not in the populated areas but Canada has lots of sparcely populated or unpopulated areas where weapons can be needed and helpful.
 
No Bob, it's your problem and for you, the American people to solve, but first you have to admit that there is a problem.

Canada has a lot of guns and so does Australia. We also have criminals. What we don't have is a sense of entitlement that says we can have as many guns as we fancy of what ever kind we can buy because over 200 years ago it was thought that every man might have to leave his fields at a moment's notice to repel the British.
 
Dame Warrigal said:
IMO the problem is that what is illegal in one state is legal in a nearby state, which makes all of your gun laws impotent. There needs to be a set of national regulations and a federal authority dealing with the problem.
Click to expand...

Both the purchase and denial of the carry permit were in Alabama. I thought forced/court ordered psychiatric incarcerations or treatment were grounds for a denial of purchase or carry. His criminal record seems to be one of arrests rather than convictions. He was arrested as late as 2011. It's sounds like he made deals to avoid an official criminal record, arrests are not convictions.
 
When your family members are afraid enough to hide your guns there should be some mechanism for removing them, at least temporarily until checks are made as to your fitness to have them.
 
Dame Warrigal said:
No Bob, it's your problem and for you, the American people to solve, but first you have to admit that there is a problem.

Canada has a lot of guns and so does Australia. We also have criminals. What we don't have is a sense of entitlement that says we can have as many guns as we fancy of what ever kind we can buy because over 200 years ago it was thought that every man might have to leave his fields at a moment's notice to repel the British.
Click to expand...

Absolutely right Warrigal. It is our job and a majority of both parties say leave us alone. It is our job to do. Enough of out of town whiners around here. Yes, the US started with guns and told the British crown where to go and how fast. Canada and Australia are only recently on your own, and even now there is still a link to he Crown. Pretty sad as you really need to be on your own to prove you can stand on your own two feet.

Just an outsider telling you how to live as you love to tell the US how to live. Enjoy your new freedom. It is fun and it has its own responsibilities. Our Constitution is now about 240 years old and has withstood the test of time quite well. Things do get changed and quite slowly as quick changes can bring in some really spontaneous and bad ideas.
 
Misty said:
I may be mistaken, but it seems like groups of people are being killed in gunfree zones and the killers feel safer. As soon as police arrive on the scene, the shooter either stops, or kills himself.
Click to expand...

You're not mistaken at all Misty, many of these mass shootings do occur in gun-free zones, movie theaters, military stations (hope that changes), schools, etc.

Besides ignoring the fact that these shootings all occur in gun-free zones, also ignored is the fact that most if not all of these people are mentally ill, many of them under the influence of prescription drugs for depression, anxiety, bi-polar, etc. I've posted an old listing here of the murderers and the prescription drugs they were taking numerous times. Many have other things in common, anti-government, racists, etc.

The side effects of these harmful pharmaceuticals are altered personalities which normally exhibit the desire to kill or commit suicide.

Funny that not too many people are talking about the tragedy of five family members killed by knife stabbings in Oklahoma...not as big a headline if it doesn't involve a gun and promote an anti-gun agenda...so sad really. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-16-18-arrested-FIVE-family-members-dead.html
 
Posted without comment.

Armed 'citizen guards' at US military offices told to stand down, Pentagon says it can handle security after Tennessee shooting

Sat 25 Jul 2015



The Pentagon has asked that concerned armed citizens not stand guard at military recruiting offices, saying it can handle security after a shooting rampage on its own. Prompted by shootings at military facilities in the US, Americans have started showing up at military recruiting offices to stand guard with handguns and rifles.

Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook said the Defence Department appreciated the "outpouring of support" but warned that the volunteers might do more harm than good.

"We ask that individuals not stand guard at recruiting offices as it could adversely impact our mission, and potentially create unintended security risks," he said.

An armed civilian guarding a recruitment centre in Ohio accidently discharged his rifle on Thursday, The Columbus Dispatch reported.



The shooting renewed a debate over military members being unarmed on US soil. The Tennessee shooter Mohammad Youssuf Abdulazeez was killed in a gunfight with civilian police.

Defence secretary Ashton Carter has promised a review of security measures but the military has resisted arming troops at home.

"We take the safety of our service members, our DoD [Department of Defence] civilians, and the families who support them very seriously," Mr Cook said.
"Secretary of Defence Ash Carter is currently reviewing recommendations from the services for making our installations and facilities safer, including our recruiting stations."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-...s-military-offices-told-to-stand-down/6647954
Click to expand...
 
Mitchezz, I think that's called the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Now where have I heard that before?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top