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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Oh boy, another gundamentalists v. gungrabbers debate. Just exactly what this thread was started for. What fun.
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?
Yes, you do. There are tons of such laws, the most typically encountered being speed limits.
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.
I’ll give you one guess what I think about speed limits.
It’s possible, but is pretty rare. You should really think about doing something about your obsession with buying trucks.
Myself and a growing number (some would say, majority) of the population.
mc
Speed limits are not a form of punishment, they are an invocation of “don’t be a jerk”.
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.
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.
Background checks are not a form of punishment, they are an invocation of “don’t be a crazy psycho criminal”