Texas Church Shooting : Thread

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: face23785

Well you realize they are working really hard to take drivers out of the equation. Cars will all ready break if you dont the next step is self driving cars. And yes gun law enforcement can work though everyone has to be on the same page. For example the airforce cant forget to notify the feds. A waiting period great idea id extend it from 3 to 7. Getting rid of loop holes to prevent background checks. You can go to a gun show with a crappy pistol that wont fire and walk away with an ar15. Ii dont think trades should be allowed without checks.

But until they perfect that, cars should be banned. If it saves one life...

That is a simple binary fallacy.
Either we prevent all deaths or prevent none.

Also:
Cars as guns? Seat belts? Drivers licenses? Safety testing and standards? Speed Limits? Stop lights? Traffic laws?
We regulate cars and who can drive and how they drive. We even test drivers.

Except all of that would turn a right into a privilege.

You don't actually sound very pro-2A to me. You sound like you're trying to have it both ways.

Rights have limitations when they infringe on other peoples right to life, liberty, happiness etc.
I am pro 2nd Amendment and Pro regulation.

Do you believe Fully Automatic weapons should be legal for anyone to purchase?
Do you believe people with a history of mental illness should be able to buy guns?
Do you believe children should be able to buy guns without parental consent?

I would argue that reasonable regulation is a good thing.
I have no fear of anyone taking my guns away.
Less ass-hats, incompetent and insane people with guns is a very good thing IMO.

The NRA believes it is their duty to fight any and all regulation.
The far left believes all guns should be banned.

I believe that law-abiding, rational citizens, well versed in gun safety should be able to purchase and own guns and that strict regulation, thorough and comprehensive background checks and waiting periods...perhaps even an exam or course on gun safety and general competence should be required.

I don't want it both ways. I just don't reside in the extremes.

a reply to: soberbacchus


Guns are a right given by god/protected & enumerated by the Constitution, driving/owning a car is a privilege given by the state.

a reply to: soberbacchus


But those who infringe on others' rights are punished severely/killed (more often). Limiting an innocent person's rights makes no sense over a very small number who abuse it. That's like abolishing the 4th amendment because 1/100 times a criminal gets away with a crime because police conduct probable cause search. Or "regulating" the first amendment because some people use it to commit the crime of assault/terroristic threats. Makes no sense.

Do you believe Fully Automatic weapons should be legal for anyone to purchase?
Do you believe people with a history of mental illness should be able to buy guns?
Do you believe children should be able to buy guns without parental consent?

1) Yes, they already are. Just have to pay the BATFE $200 and wait a few months. I purchased a short barrel machinegun this way. Have owned it for 12 years, and it has never broken any laws. If you can pass standard background check for firearms then you pass BATFE NFA check.

2) Depends if they've engaged in violent actions. Stigmatizing mental illness isn't the solution. Most people with mental illness are non-violent, and unless there is clear/moving evidence, then my answer to this is NO. Only because such a system could be abused (given how many leftists label conservatives "mentally ill" for differing opinions already) to deny people a fundamental and unalienable right.

3) No. Because a child isn't responsible for themselves until they're 18. For example, a parent can search a child's belongings (since it is really the parent's property) and can also consent to law enforcement search of their child without child's consent. That being said, my children had rifles since they were little. Granted the ammunition stayed in my safe, but there were many times (when they were a little older) they would take the ATVs and their rifles out to shoot on their own. My daughters are very independent and highly intelligent, and both went through several safety/CCW courses with me when they were young over the years.

As far as competency goes, sure. As long as the NRA (or like) organization handles it, and not the oversized invasive government. I fully support providing free training to people who own/carry firearms.

Cars, OTOH, are not a protected right and only a mere privilege. Given the fact that many more die from car related issues (accidents, texting/distracted, DUI, etc) you'd think the left would be attacking cars. So few people die from mass shootings/terrorism that this is a non issue.

As always, it is sad that people die but that is the cost of freedom and liberty. Freedom isn't free, and no one has ever claimed it was. In fact, we were told all throughout our lives that the cost of freedom was high, and that it'd be on our shoulders to burden that cost someday.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Do you believe Fully Automatic weapons should be legal for anyone to purchase?

Yes.

Do you believe people with a history of mental illness should be able to buy guns?

I believe the adjudication system and NICS reporting need improvement and legal brick walls removed. I think we should use the guidelines currently in place, actually enforce them, and prevent dangerously mentally ill people from getting guns. I don't believe treating mental illness like a blanket problem that government can use to arbitrarily deny rights is a good idea, and we all know that's exactly what would happen.

Do you believe children should be able to buy guns without parental consent?

There is NO ONE who believes this and it is already illegal. Moot point.

strict regulation

Strict regulation ? What does that mean exactly?

thorough and comprehensive background checks and waiting periods

There has never been any conclusive data that a waiting period has any effect.

Background checks seemed to work real well in Las Vegas, and in Sunderland where the gunman was able to buy a gun because his criminal history was never submitted to NICS.

Also they seemed to work really well when Muslim terrorist Omar Mateen decided to kill 50 people at a night club.

There are several questions that are being ignored and should be asked:

How did a person who was dishonorably discharged get ahold of and own a firearm?

He was not allowed to, according to law and statute.

There are questions as to why he did such.

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
There are several questions that are being ignored and should be asked:

How did a person who was dishonorably discharged get ahold of and own a firearm?

He was not allowed to, according to law and statute.

There are questions as to why he did such.

Because the air force didn't report it IAW federal law.

The gunman who killed 26 people at a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, escaped from a mental health facility in New Mexico in 2012.

He had been checked into the facility following an attempt to sneak firearms into an Air Force base in a plot to carry out the death threats he made against his chain of command, according to police records.

Devin Patrick Kelley, 26, escaped the Peak Behavioral Health Services in Sunland Park, New Mexico, and was first reported missing by one of the facility's employees around 11:20 p.m., June 13, 2012, according to a police report from the El Paso Police Department first obtained by Houston's Channel 2 News.

The employee told police Kelley "was a danger to himself and others as he had already been caught sneaking firearms onto Holloman Air Force Base," according to the report. The employee said Kelley was "attempting to carry out death threats that [he] had made on his military chain of command."

www.chron.com...

This man seemed to have had serious mental health issues, more then what was first stated.

originally posted by: truthseeking
a reply to: face23785

A big mental health problem? Why doesn't the US have the highest rate of mass run-overs via vehicles? Or mass stabbings?
On one hand you admit that the US is full of insane people, but on the other hand you twist the fact that these insane people have very easy access to extremely effective mass - killing devices; by saying that 'not enough of them are using guns to kill, considering the fact we have gazillions of guns'?
That is simply illogical and a self - destructive way of thinking. If the majority of Americans share your twisted thought process, no wonder the US suffers the way that it does.

What weapon people choose to use is irrelevant. If they couldn't get a gun they'd just use something else. What's illogical is pretending that someone who has decided to commit murder will change their mind if they can't get a gun. Between 3,000 and 4,000 people are murdered every year in the US without a gun. That's 1/3 of our murders. Clearly people aren't afraid to kill without a gun. We have a violent crime problem.

a reply to: riiver

school shootings predate the founding of america en.wikipedia.org...

The Enoch Brown school massacre[1] was "one of the most notorious incidents"[2] of Pontiac's War. On July 26, 1764, four Delaware (Lenape) American Indians entered a settlers' log schoolhouse in the Province of Pennsylvania in what is now Franklin County, near the present-day city of Greencastle. Inside were the schoolmaster, Enoch Brown, and a number of young students. Brown pleaded with the warriors to spare the children; nonetheless he was shot and scalped.[3] The warriors then tomahawked and scalped the children. Brown and nine children were killed.[2][3] Two scalped children survived their wounds.[3] Four children were taken as prisoners.[2] A day earlier, the warriors had encountered a pregnant woman, Susan King Cunningham, on the road. She was beaten to death, scalped, and the baby was cut out of her body.[3] When the warriors returned to their village on the Muskingum River in the Ohio Country and showed the scalps, an elder Delaware chief rebuked them as cowards for attacking children.[3]

en.wikipedia.org... two in the 18th century 38 from 1800's-1900s 227 from 1900-2000 and 194 from 2000-2017 ,now they were not as bad back in the day to claim that they only happened after the 1990s is false . grand total of 461 since 1764 was gonna do a further break down but math is hard and im lazy

originally posted by: roadgravel

The gunman who killed 26 people at a church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, escaped from a mental health facility in New Mexico in 2012.

He had been checked into the facility following an attempt to sneak firearms into an Air Force base in a plot to carry out the death threats he made against his chain of command, according to police records.

Devin Patrick Kelley, 26, escaped the Peak Behavioral Health Services in Sunland Park, New Mexico, and was first reported missing by one of the facility's employees around 11:20 p.m., June 13, 2012, according to a police report from the El Paso Police Department first obtained by Houston's Channel 2 News.

The employee told police Kelley "was a danger to himself and others as he had already been caught sneaking firearms onto Holloman Air Force Base," according to the report. The employee said Kelley was "attempting to carry out death threats that [he] had made on his military chain of command."

www.chron.com...

This man seemed to have had serious mental health issues, more then what was first stated.

This shouldn't surprise anyone. No matter what kind of family problems you have, you're not gonna walk into a church and kill dozens of people if you are of sound mind. His in-laws he was having problems with weren't even there.

He tried to bring guns onto his base to kill the chain of command and the Air Force doesn't even update records after all of his displayed issues.

All I can say is it's the typical government work...

a reply to: roadgravel

Everything he did is grounds for adjudication.

Why this didn't happen is beyond me.

How many more of these people are out there. There are lists of sex offenders but what about dangerous mental cases.

I guess it's not PC to mention crazy people.

a reply to: projectvxn

So in short, we both believe in the right to own guns and we both believe that right has limitations and should be regulated.

The specifics of regulation are what we likely disagree on.

There are extremists that believe their should be no limitation or regulation on purchasing guns.
There are extremists who believe all guns should be banned in the USA.

I am neither of those.

That is not wanting to have it both ways as you put it.

I am pro-2nd amendment and pro regulation.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: roadgravel

Everything he did is grounds for adjudication.

Why this didn't happen is beyond me.

I was in the Air Force from 2004 to 2016. Over those years, I noticed a significant softening of how we dealt with malcontents. Part of the "military should be for everyone" movement. Bending over backwards to accommodate people who aren't cut out for that lifestyle, in the name of "inclusiveness". Part of that was a serious cutback on discipline.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: soberbacchus


Guns are a right given by god/protected & enumerated by the Constitution.

Would you mind citing the biblical passage?

originally posted by: roadgravel
How many more of these people are out there. There are lists of sex offenders but what about dangerous mental cases.

I guess it's not PC to mention crazy people.

The bleeding hearts got ahold of that issue decades ago. People like this used to be put away so they couldn't harm the rest of us. But then oh my god, what about their quality of life? Sure, let them roam around, who cares about the quality of life for the people they gear up and shoot, or the kids they set on fire when they forget to take their meds (that was a heartbreaking story I saw a few years ago).

Granted the way we used to treat these people way back when was terrible and inhumane. I'm not saying go back to that. But there's got to be some middle ground between that and what we have now.

a reply to: roadgravel


Which is exactly why I laugh at individuals who believe government is some omnipotent ultra-efficient machine.

For the most part, the best and the brightest go to the private sector/defense contractors and public employees make up the "bulk" leftover. These aren't the chiseled feature/ultra intelligent figures depicted by Hollywood that is for sure.

They can't protect their data (constant breaches: int/ext) nor can they function properly due to the ridiculous bureaucracy. This is a lethal combination to someone who wasn't very good at their job from the beginning.

Clearly it is time to restore a tested-knowledge/merit based hiring process. Lowering public spending and trimming the fat (removing unneeded employees) would allow for better wages to attract much better talent.

www.nap.edu... for any one actually interested this seems to be the most comprehensive link i can find its over 10 chapters with dozens of dozens of pages for each chapter .it coveres everything from statistics on gun deaths suicides mass shootings self defense with fire arms and the hurdles researchers have in compiling data

a reply to: soberbacchus


I don't know it.

Didn't the bible say one should sell basically everything they own (if needed) to buy a sword, though?

The premise of the Constitution was enumerating god-given unalienable rights. It clearly says the document itself confers no rights on anyone, simply provides enumeration/protection of those rights.

Am I mistaken in that assertion?