Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 11-07-2017, 02:08 PM
wguy123 wguy123 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by doorhinge View Post
Yes, trucks have been as deadly as any firearm. The result of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing killed 168 people, injured more than 680 others, and destroyed one-third of the building. The blast destroyed or damaged 324 other buildings within a 16-block radius, shattered glass in 258 nearby buildings, and destroyed or burned 86 cars. According to Wiki.

Guns and trucks don't kill people. People kill people.
And again, they passed regulations to make this form of attack harder (along with flying planes into buildings). Thanks for showing that we should pass regulation to make it harder for people to use guns to commit mass murders.
  #152  
Old 11-07-2017, 02:10 PM
Doctor Jackson Doctor Jackson is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Jawja
Posts: 9,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by galen ubal View Post
Which has no correlation to murder rates...
Quote:
But if we do look for now at correlation, it seems to me that the key question should focus on state total homicide rates, or perhaps (for reasons I describe below) total intentional homicide plus accidental gun death rates. And it turns out that there is essentially zero correlation between these numbers and state gun laws.
Sorry, the problems behind these instances cannot be reduced to a neat sound bite.

Last edited by Doctor Jackson; 11-07-2017 at 02:10 PM.
  #153  
Old 11-07-2017, 03:15 PM
Orwell Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 1,687
Perhaps I missed seeing it anywhere here on the SD forums, but it bears repeating that a neighbor with an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle put an end to the mass murder event. Funny how the popular media (and most posters here on SDMB) wants to gloss over the fact that an armed neighbor shot the church murderer, stopping further murders. It would have been better, of course, had he reacted faster, but better late than never. A good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun, using a gun that the gun control crowd wants to ban.
  #154  
Old 11-07-2017, 03:25 PM
steronz steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
Perhaps I missed seeing it anywhere here on the SD forums, but it bears repeating that a neighbor with an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle put an end to the mass murder event. Funny how the popular media (and most posters here on SDMB) wants to gloss over the fact that an armed neighbor shot the church murderer, stopping further murders. It would have been better, of course, had he reacted faster, but better late than never. A good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun, using a gun that the gun control crowd wants to ban.
It's been discussed, the reason it's not been discussed more is because reality doesn't match your version. Consider

A) The shooter had already left the church before he was confronted by the neighbor, suggesting that his spree was likely already over,
B) The neighbor shot the guy twice but he didn't actually, you know, die until he shot himself in the head

It's not the worse "good guy with a gun story" I've heard, but it's not the best, either. Reality never plays out quite as well as the fantasies. Everyone inside that church would have been better off if neither of those AR-15s existed.
  #155  
Old 11-07-2017, 03:30 PM
Spiderman Spiderman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: somewhere East of there
Posts: 8,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
Perhaps I missed seeing it anywhere here on the SD forums, but it bears repeating that a neighbor with an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle put an end to the mass murder event. Funny how the popular media (and most posters here on SDMB) wants to gloss over the fact that an armed neighbor shot the church murderer, stopping further murders. It would have been better, of course, had he reacted faster, but better late than never. A good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun, using a gun that the gun control crowd wants to ban.
Pssst - Post #100
  #156  
Old 11-07-2017, 03:36 PM
wguy123 wguy123 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman View Post
Pssst - Post #100
I've seen it in multiple spots on this forum along with a ton of mainstream media coverage. I guess until the "good guy with a gun" is the headline instead of "another mass murder due to guns", it's all liberal bias.
  #157  
Old 11-07-2017, 03:39 PM
TimeWinder TimeWinder is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Albany/Corvallis, OR
Posts: 4,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
A good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun, using a gun that the gun control crowd wants to ban.
Had the gun control crowd had their way, the BAD GUY would not have had a gun, either, and there would be no need of the post-hoc good guy. And dozens of people wouldn't be dead.

Last edited by TimeWinder; 11-07-2017 at 03:40 PM.
  #158  
Old 11-07-2017, 03:48 PM
Magiver Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 26,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Yeah, I realized I was wrong about the background check and posted a correction.

It is only harder if you consider waiting for a background check to be "hard"
OK, lets expand on that. The purpose of the background check is to screen out the obvious. It's hard for those who aren't supposed to be able to purchase a gun. It's not meant to be hard for those who can legitimately purchase one. For people with a CCW license there is a required safety course to obtain the license.
__________________
"People enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought": John Anderson
  #159  
Old 11-07-2017, 03:51 PM
Magiver Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 26,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeWinder View Post
Had the gun control crowd had their way, the BAD GUY would not have had a gun, either, and there would be no need of the post-hoc good guy. And dozens of people wouldn't be dead.
This is patently absurd. At best you would have a law abiding citizen without a gun. But unless you have a solution to the heroin problem you don't have a method for removing guns. On top of that there is no evidence you can produce that the killer couldn't have killed those people using other methods.
__________________
"People enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought": John Anderson
  #160  
Old 11-07-2017, 03:56 PM
Orwell Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 1,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
It's been discussed, the reason it's not been discussed more is because reality doesn't match your version. Consider

A) The shooter had already left the church before he was confronted by the neighbor, suggesting that his spree was likely already over,
B) The neighbor shot the guy twice but he didn't actually, you know, die until he shot himself in the head

It's not the worse "good guy with a gun story" I've heard, but it's not the best, either. Reality never plays out quite as well as the fantasies. Everyone inside that church would have been better off if neither of those AR-15s existed.
The reports I've read seem to indicate that both shots were severe wounds, and they possibly, you know, resulted in the murderer losing control of his truck in a pretty significant accident. That he shot himself in the head is certainly a bonus all-around.

You seem pretty sure the shooter had wrapped up his day and was going home to enjoy a nice, cold beer rather than, you know, continuing to shoot other people in other locations.
  #161  
Old 11-07-2017, 03:58 PM
Orwell Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 1,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimeWinder View Post
Had the gun control crowd had their way, the BAD GUY would not have had a gun, either, and there would be no need of the post-hoc good guy. And dozens of people wouldn't be dead.
He wouldn't have? Nobody ever gets their hands on guns where they are illegal? Or nobody who is disallowed ever uses guns to kill people? So that's why we have no illegal drug use in this country!! Huh.
  #162  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:01 PM
doorhinge doorhinge is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 8,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Post shortened, emphasis added, eyes rolled.
Another mass murderer found a way to commit mass murder.
  #163  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:03 PM
doorhinge doorhinge is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 8,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by wguy123 View Post
And again, they passed regulations to make this form of attack harder (along with flying planes into buildings). Thanks for showing that we should pass regulation to make it harder for people to use guns to commit mass murders.
And trucks are still being used by mass murderers to commit mass murder.
  #164  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:03 PM
steronz steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
The reports I've read seem to indicate that both shots were severe wounds, and they possibly, you know, resulted in the murderer losing control of his truck in a pretty significant accident. That he shot himself in the head is certainly a bonus all-around.
Sure, possibly. Not exactly a slam dunk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
You seem pretty sure the shooter had wrapped up his day and was going home to enjoy a nice, cold beer rather than, you know, continuing to shoot other people in other locations.
I'm not sure of anything, in fact (check's post), yep, I said the fact that he had left "suggested" the spree was over. Not my strongest endorsement. You, however...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
it bears repeating that a neighbor with an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle put an end to the mass murder event.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
A good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun
No hesitation in your own post.

All I'm saying is that [possibly] stopping a mass shooting spree 450 rounds in, after everyone in the building had already been hit and the shooter left isn't exactly a stellar example of your point.

Last edited by steronz; 11-07-2017 at 04:05 PM.
  #165  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:05 PM
steronz steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by doorhinge View Post
Another mass murderer found a way to commit mass murder.
I know, and he used a truck. Can you believe it? That's why we all refer to it as the Oklahoma City trucking of 1995.
  #166  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:17 PM
Orwell Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 1,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post

No hesitation in your own post.

All I'm saying is that [possibly] stopping a mass shooting spree 450 rounds in, after everyone in the building had already been hit and the shooter left isn't exactly a stellar example of your point.
I admit it would have been better if someone in the church had shot him sooner, and given that it was in Texas, I'm a little surprised if that didn't happen. But, apparently, the guy was wearing body armor, which would have given him a fair amount of protection from most handgun shots.

I still say that it is not reasonable to assume that the shooter was done killing people when he left the church.
  #167  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:19 PM
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
OK, lets expand on that. The purpose of the background check is to screen out the obvious. It's hard for those who aren't supposed to be able to purchase a gun. It's not meant to be hard for those who can legitimately purchase one. For people with a CCW license there is a required safety course to obtain the license.
Filling out a form and waiting for a background check is not in my definition of "hard"

And we weren't talking about a CCW license, we were talking about purchasing a gun.
  #168  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:22 PM
Orwell Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 1,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
Filling out a form and waiting for a background check is not in my definition of "hard".
And paying a fee for the background check. And all of that has to be done even if you just did it the week before. Trying hard to think of other constitutional rights that require background checks, forms and fees, and coming up empty.
  #169  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:26 PM
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
And paying a fee for the background check. And all of that has to be done even if you just did it the week before. Trying hard to think of other constitutional rights that require background checks, forms and fees, and coming up empty.
If you don't want to do that, just go to a gun show, and then you don't need a fee or a background check. Seems pretty easy to me.

Plus, filling out a form is not "hard" no matter how onerous you think it might be.
  #170  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:27 PM
steronz steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
I admit it would have been better if someone in the church had shot him sooner, and given that it was in Texas, I'm a little surprised if that didn't happen. But, apparently, the guy was wearing body armor, which would have given him a fair amount of protection from most handgun shots.
Sure, I'll admit that the fantasy is always better than the reality too. The shooters generally show up better prepared, more guns, more ammo, body armor, and are ready to kill. In every way they have the upper hand. Sometimes a good guy with a gun has improved the outcome, but it's just not a workable strategy for preventing mass shootings. And in this case the reason we're not talking about it isn't because we're unwilling to admit that a good guy saved the day, but because the facts don't support that conclusion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
I still say that it is not reasonable to assume that the shooter was done killing people when he left the church.
You and I are just going to have different definitions of what's reasonable then. Per reports, there were 15 empty 30 round magazines in the church. How much ammo do you think this guy was carrying? What does 450 rounds weigh? He dropped his AR when he fled, probably because he had nothing left for it. All indications suggest that it was already over. I can't say for sure he wasn't going to shoot anyone, hell, there's a good chance that he was mad his in-laws weren't there and was going to go hunt them down with his sidearm, but it's reasonable to think that the bulk of the shooting had already ended by the time the neighbor showed up.
  #171  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:32 PM
doorhinge doorhinge is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 8,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
I know, and he used a truck. Can you believe it? That's why we all refer to it as the Oklahoma City trucking of 1995.
(underline added)

Who is this "we" you are referring to?

I have noticed that mass murderers do not limit themselves to your weapon of choice. The one thing that all mass murderers do seem to have in common is their willingness to commit mass murder.
  #172  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:34 PM
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
Trying hard to think of other constitutional rights that require background checks, forms and fees, and coming up empty.
The 26th Amendment made it possible for people who were 18 to vote. Yet, I had to register to vote by filling out an onerous form! And in some states, I need an ID to vote! It's very hard to vote. Much easier to buy a truck.
  #173  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:39 PM
Orwell Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 1,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
If you don't want to do that, just go to a gun show, and then you don't need a fee or a background check. Seems pretty easy to me.

Plus, filling out a form is not "hard" no matter how onerous you think it might be.
I've been to many gun shows and even bought a few guns there. I had to fill out the forms, have background checks and pay the fees every time. You are referring to person-to-person individual sales, which sometimes don't require background checks etc., depending on the state and type of gun. There is no "gun show loophole" that I've ever seen.
  #174  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:39 PM
steronz steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by doorhinge View Post
(underline added)

Who is this "we" you are referring to?

I have noticed that mass murderers do not limit themselves to your weapon of choice. The one thing that all mass murderers do seem to have in common is their willingness to commit mass murder.
(underline added)

What a stunning observation. What other tautologies can you tell us about? The one thing all grounds keepers do seem to have in common is their willingness to keep grounds. The one thing all basketball players have in common is their willingness to play basketball.

Now that we've got such brilliant observations under our belt, would you care to explain why you brought up a bombing in response to a post about truck/car attacks? Is it clever to point out that the bomb was transported in a truck?
  #175  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:40 PM
running coach running coach is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 32,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Sure, I'll admit that the fantasy is always better than the reality too. The shooters generally show up better prepared, more guns, more ammo, body armor, and are ready to kill. In every way they have the upper hand. Sometimes a good guy with a gun has improved the outcome, but it's just not a workable strategy for preventing mass shootings. And in this case the reason we're not talking about it isn't because we're unwilling to admit that a good guy saved the day, but because the facts don't support that conclusion.



You and I are just going to have different definitions of what's reasonable then. Per reports, there were 15 empty 30 round magazines in the church. How much ammo do you think this guy was carrying? What does 450 rounds weigh? He dropped his AR when he fled, probably because he had nothing left for it. All indications suggest that it was already over. I can't say for sure he wasn't going to shoot anyone, hell, there's a good chance that he was mad his in-laws weren't there and was going to go hunt them down with his sidearm, but it's reasonable to think that the bulk of the shooting had already ended by the time the neighbor showed up.
All the stories I've seen is he dropped it in response to being hit twice(three?) by the neighbor. I haven't seen mentioned if he had more ammo in his truck but he did still have two handguns when he fled.
  #176  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:47 PM
Magiver Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 26,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
I can't say for sure he wasn't going to shoot anyone, hell, there's a good chance that he was mad his in-laws weren't there and was going to go hunt them down with his sidearm, but it's reasonable to think that the bulk of the shooting had already ended by the time the neighbor showed up.
I wouldn't disagree with your assessment except he was a nutjob. He was mad at the world, thought religious people were stupid and somehow linked it all to his mother inlaw. If I were to make a SWAG, I'd say he was unhappy and despised people who were happy with their god. His MIL said something to drive home that point.
__________________
"People enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought": John Anderson
  #177  
Old 11-07-2017, 04:49 PM
Orwell Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 1,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
You and I are just going to have different definitions of what's reasonable then. Per reports, there were 15 empty 30 round magazines in the church. How much ammo do you think this guy was carrying? What does 450 rounds weigh? He dropped his AR when he fled, probably because he had nothing left for it. All indications suggest that it was already over. I can't say for sure he wasn't going to shoot anyone, hell, there's a good chance that he was mad his in-laws weren't there and was going to go hunt them down with his sidearm, but it's reasonable to think that the bulk of the shooting had already ended by the time the neighbor showed up.
It appears that his in-laws were part of his motivation. At the very least, it's not hard to think he would have continued to go after them. But who really knows? I think using the term "reasonable" is out of place regarding this guy, no matter who says it.

The guy had been drummed out of the military, had a history of domestic violence, had apparently escaped from a mental health center and had sent threatening text messages to his mother-in-law. The guy was a powder keg ready to blow.
  #178  
Old 11-07-2017, 05:33 PM
Spiderman Spiderman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: somewhere East of there
Posts: 8,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
At best you would have a law abiding citizen without a gun. But unless you have a solution to the heroin problem you don't have a method for removing guns. On top of that there is no evidence you can produce that the killer couldn't have killed those people using other methods.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CNN
He spent 12 months in a military prison for assaulting his then-wife and stepson and received a bad-conduct discharge.
He was charged with animal cruelty on suspicion of beating a dog.
<snip>
Kelley initially faced multiple charges in his 2012 court-martial, according to records CNN reviewed. He was originally charged with assault and battery against his spouse, aggravated assault against his stepson and four charges involving firearms, including two of pointing a loaded firearm at his wife and two of pointing an unloaded firearm.
The firearms charges were dropped before trial as a result of an agreement in which Kelley pleaded guilty to the aggravated assault against the child and the assault against his wife.
As part of his plea, Kelley admitted to hitting his stepson on the head and body "with a force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm." The injuries fractured the young boy's skull and caused internal bleeding, Christensen told CNN.
Kelley also admitted to hitting and kicking his wife repeatedly, choking her and pulling her hair.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYTimes
The gunman who killed 26 people in a rural Texas church on Sunday escaped from a psychiatric hospital while he was in the Air Force, after making death threats against his superiors and trying to smuggle weapons onto the base where he was stationed, a 2012 police report shows.

The police took the man, Devin P. Kelley, into custody at a bus station in downtown El Paso, where he apparently planned to flee on a bus after escaping from Peak Behavioral Health Services, a hospital a few miles away in Santa Teresa, N.M. He was sent there after being charged in a military court with assaulting his wife and baby stepson, charges he later pleaded guilty to.

The report filed by the El Paso officers says that the person who reported Mr. Kelley missing from the hospital advised them that he “suffered from mental disorders,” and that he “was attempting to carry out death threats” against “his military chain of command.” The man “was a danger to himself and others as he had already been caught sneaking firearms onto Holloman Air Force Base,”
I think we have different definitions of "law abiding"
  #179  
Old 11-07-2017, 06:01 PM
snfaulkner snfaulkner is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: 123 Fake Street
Posts: 5,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
No I'm not basically saying that and I already posted some suggestions.

Yes. And again, I addressed that issue although in a "read between the lines" manner. If you don't address root causes then the solution is a waste of time and money.

I'll give you a simple example, We spend billions on security systems for airports that don't work. They don't address human behavior. The Israelis use an interviewing system done in layers that focuses directly on human behavior.
Serious curious question to anybody, what are the Israeli gun laws like?
  #180  
Old 11-07-2017, 06:21 PM
Bryan Ekers Bryan Ekers is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 56,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
I know, and he used a truck. Can you believe it? That's why we all refer to it as the Oklahoma City trucking of 1995.
Do you know how guns get to gun stores where would-be murderers can buy them? By truck! Therefore, every shooting was a trucking first.
__________________
Spoofe - Damn youse, Ekers! Damn youse to hell!
Gazelle from Hell - Bwahahahahaha! Oh, my sides! Bryan, you are my hero.
Arnold Winkelreid - Believe me, I would gladly trade all that money in for a romantic walk on the beach with you, Bryan.
Muad'Dib - DAMN YOU BRYAN EKERS !!!!!!!!!! DAMN YOU TO HELL!!!!!!
  #181  
Old 11-07-2017, 08:00 PM
Idle Thoughts Idle Thoughts is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Posts: 12,248
Moderating

Quote:
Originally Posted by Idle Thoughts View Post
This is a warning for you for being a jerk/trolling.
I am reversing this warning as it turns out it wasn't trolling as I thought it was, but a reference to a show I've never seen.
  #182  
Old 11-07-2017, 08:07 PM
eschereal eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 11,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman View Post
I think we have different definitions of "law abiding"
I think Magiver was referring to the “good guy with a gun”, who shot at Kelley, as the “law abiding” citizen. Though, shooting at people is generally not abiding by the law, in and of itself, and can result in other problems, which is why it is usually discouraged. When there is a “good guy” with a gun facing a “bad guy” with a gun (whichever is which), seems like the best place to be is somewhere else, out of range or behind very thick things.
  #183  
Old 11-07-2017, 08:14 PM
Orwell Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 1,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman View Post
I think we have different definitions of "law abiding"
I believe you are proving his point. Someone intent on murder, especially mass murder, does not care about laws. Gun laws only impact law-abiding people, not criminals.

The Air Force is admitting it didn't notify the FBI about the shooter's domestic violence and other misdeeds.
  #184  
Old 11-07-2017, 09:23 PM
Magiver Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 26,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman View Post
I think we have different definitions of "law abiding"
I don't understand your point. He wasn't a law abiding citizen and his military record was not forwarded to the ban list that would have prevented the sale of the guns he bought.

Really, what point are you trying to make? `
__________________
"People enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought": John Anderson
  #185  
Old 11-07-2017, 11:09 PM
Spiderman Spiderman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: somewhere East of there
Posts: 8,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
I don't understand your point. He wasn't a law abiding citizen and his military record was not forwarded to the ban list that would have prevented the sale of the guns he bought.

Really, what point are you trying to make? `
You were calling a murderer a "law abiding citizen" & I call Bullshit. You have one guy who shoots up a house of worship, killing 26 & injuring many more by shooting 450 rounds. Then you have another guy, a private citizen, who shows up, gets into a gun battle with someone dressed in body armor; was he sure this was the gunman & not a LEO SWAT officer before pulling the trigger? He then talks a stranger into a reckless (95 mph, swerving around other traffic) pursuit. He was in no danger, yet he chases a guy, only to pull his gun again when he catches up to him. What if the autopsies reveal he missed with one of his shots & it was his gun which killed one of the people in the church? What if they had an accident & killed someone in their pursuit? Where I live, one can use deadly force to defend oneself; he went far beyond that. He's a vigilante who should be facing a whole list of charges.
  #186  
Old 11-08-2017, 01:50 PM
doorhinge doorhinge is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 8,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
What a stunning observation.

Stunning to whom? You?

I have noticed that mass murderers do not limit themselves to one type of weapon. The one thing that all mass murderers do seem to have in common is their willingness to commit mass murder. The choice of weapon is theirs. If you did have the votes to ban all firearms, which you don't, you still haven't addressed the issue of how to stop mass murders from committing mass murder. What you would have done is to prevent U.S. residents from defending themselves with firearms.

Was this particular Texas church a designated gun-free zone?

Did this mass murdering monster know if his in-laws had firearms at their home? Would the monster have known whether his in-laws knew how to effectively use firearms?

There are still so many questions that should be answered.
  #187  
Old 11-08-2017, 02:12 PM
Dallas Jones Dallas Jones is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Orygun forest
Posts: 4,485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
I believe you are proving his point. Someone intent on murder, especially mass murder, does not care about laws. Gun laws only impact law-abiding people, not criminals.

The Air Force is admitting it didn't notify the FBI about the shooter's domestic violence and other misdeeds.
He had previously escaped from a mental hospital and should not have been allow to buy guns. He had been caught sneaking weapons onto an Air Force base and making death threats toward command.

His domestic violence record alone should have barred him under Texas law from buying a gun.

The Air Force acknowledged Monday it did not appropriately relay Kelley's court-martial conviction for domestic assault to civilian law enforcement, preventing it from appearing in three databases, including the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

The Air Force dropped the ball here. There are several laws in place that would have kept guns out of this guys hands. He is a nut job, as are most or all mass shooters.

The only purpose of more gun restrictions is to remove them from the hands of law abiding citizens. Gun control proponents should just be honest in stating their goal, to disarm the US.

Excerpts in the above post are from that bastion of NRA propaganda CNN.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/us/dev...ect/index.html
  #188  
Old 11-08-2017, 02:34 PM
Orwell Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 1,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallas Jones View Post
The Air Force dropped the ball here. There are several laws in place that would have kept guns out of this guys hands.
He would not have legally been able to buy or own guns, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't have gotten them illegally. Given the number of prohibited people caught with guns, it's not much of a stretch to think he would have acquired them illegally. Or used other means to kill lots of people.

Quote:
The only purpose of more gun restrictions is to remove them from the hands of law abiding citizens. Gun control proponents should just be honest in stating their goal, to disarm the US.
I think a lot of gun control advocates want exactly that. Others, however, want "reasonable" restrictions that will somehow magically weed out criminals. It's all nonsense. Cocaine, heroin and marijuana have been illegal for decades, yet none are hard to get and thousands of people are caught with them every day.
  #189  
Old 11-08-2017, 02:41 PM
eschereal eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 11,913
Oh boy, another gundamentalists v. gungrabbers debate. Just exactly what this thread was started for. What fun.
  #190  
Old 11-08-2017, 02:43 PM
mikecurtis mikecurtis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: chicago
Posts: 935
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
He would not have legally been able to buy or own guns, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't have gotten them illegally. Given the number of prohibited people caught with guns, it's not much of a stretch to think he would have acquired them illegally. Or used other means to kill lots of people.



I think a lot of gun control advocates want exactly that. Others, however, want "reasonable" restrictions that will somehow magically weed out criminals. It's all nonsense. Cocaine, heroin and marijuana have been illegal for decades, yet none are hard to get and thousands of people are caught with them every day.
So youre saying we shouldnt even try to make our world a safer place, just because some would choose to not abide those attemps?

mc
  #191  
Old 11-08-2017, 03:22 PM
Orwell Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 1,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikecurtis View Post
So youre saying we shouldnt even try to make our world a safer place, just because some would choose to not abide those attemps?

mc
No, you use laws and prisons to punish people who harm others. You don't pass laws and regulations that restrict law-abiding people from doing things that cause no harm to others. I'll put aside the constitutional argument for a second, because I would apply this general rule to everything, from drugs to sex to speeding to guns. I don't care what people do so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else or infringe on anyone else's rights.

Murder is illegal because it harms others (obviously). Who cares what implement is used?
  #192  
Old 11-08-2017, 04:14 PM
epbrown01 epbrown01 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
No, you use laws and prisons to punish people who harm others. You don't pass laws and regulations that restrict law-abiding people from doing things that cause no harm to others.
Yes, you do. There are tons of such laws, the most typically encountered being speed limits.
__________________
And then, I'll eat the sushi with my blood on it!
  #193  
Old 11-08-2017, 04:29 PM
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
I've been to many gun shows and even bought a few guns there. I had to fill out the forms, have background checks and pay the fees every time. You are referring to person-to-person individual sales, which sometimes don't require background checks etc., depending on the state and type of gun. There is no "gun show loophole" that I've ever seen.
So it's possible to legally purchase a gun without a background check or forms to fill out? Wow! That's really hard. Much harder than purchasing a truck.

Last edited by manson1972; 11-08-2017 at 04:29 PM.
  #194  
Old 11-08-2017, 04:34 PM
Orwell Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 1,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by epbrown01 View Post
Yes, you do. There are tons of such laws, the most typically encountered being speed limits.
I'll give you one guess what I think about speed limits.
  #195  
Old 11-08-2017, 04:36 PM
Orwell Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 1,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by manson1972 View Post
So it's possible to legally purchase a gun without a background check or forms to fill out? Wow! That's really hard. Much harder than purchasing a truck.
It's possible, but is pretty rare. You should really think about doing something about your obsession with buying trucks.
  #196  
Old 11-08-2017, 04:36 PM
mikecurtis mikecurtis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: chicago
Posts: 935
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post

. . . Who cares what implement is used?
Myself and a growing number (some would say, majority) of the population.

mc
  #197  
Old 11-08-2017, 04:51 PM
eschereal eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 11,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by epbrown01 View Post
Yes, you do. There are tons of such laws, the most typically encountered being speed limits.
Speed limits are not a form of punishment, they are an invocation of “don’t be a jerk”.
  #198  
Old 11-08-2017, 05:35 PM
Magiver Magiver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 26,942
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman View Post
What if the autopsies reveal he missed with one of his shots & it was his gun which killed one of the people in the church? What if they had an accident & killed someone in their pursuit? Where I live, one can use deadly force to defend oneself; he went far beyond that. He's a vigilante who should be facing a whole list of charges.
What if the autopsy included 30 more people.

What if he shot YOUR family dead after you dialed 911 waiting for the police to arrive?

See how that works? We can do the what if game all day long.

In reality what DID happen was that a private citizen stopped a mad man from killing more people including his MIL who was not present at the church.
__________________
"People enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought": John Anderson
  #199  
Old 11-08-2017, 07:35 PM
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
It's possible, but is pretty rare. You should really think about doing something about your obsession with buying trucks.
I don't think it's that rare at all. I have no obsession with trucks. Just a response to the poster who said it was easier to buy a truck than a gun.
  #200  
Old 11-08-2017, 07:37 PM
manson1972 manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschereal View Post
Speed limits are not a form of punishment, they are an invocation of “don’t be a jerk”.
Background checks are not a form of punishment, they are an invocation of "don't be a crazy psycho criminal"
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017