Navy Yard Shooting

Guitar92player

http://news.yahoo.com/contract-worker-b ... 47531.html

Apparently this guy had lots of issues, yet he legally bought a gun.

So when can we finally get those universal background checks?

Guitar92player

aerial wrote:

Those that feel less guns mean less crime, would you put a sign in front of your home stating.... this is a
"Gun Free Home"?

You can have 1000 guns in your home, but the element of surprise can still get you. Just sayin.

gimmesometruth27

Guitar92player wrote:

So when can we finally get those universal background checks?

nope, never....


:fp: :fp: :fp: :fp: :fp: :fp:


this is going to happen again and again and again.

we are all gonna be upset, sad, or angry for a few days.

and then we are gonna forget all about it.

until it happens again.

welcome to america.

land of the "free", home of the gun, and home of the whopper.

JimmyV

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Guitar92player wrote:

So when can we finally get those universal background checks?

nope, never....


:fp: :fp: :fp: :fp: :fp: :fp:


this is going to happen again and again and again.

we are all gonna be upset, sad, or angry for a few days.

and then we are gonna forget all about it.

until it happens again.

welcome to america.

land of the "free", home of the gun, and home of the whopper.

Agreed. Aurora didn't change anything. Newtown didn't change anything. This won't change anything.

gimmesometruth27

JimmyV wrote:

Agreed. Aurora didn't change anything. Newtown didn't change anything. This won't change anything.

if newtown didn't change anything, nothing ever will.

our society of violence is just fucked.

over 90% of americans want tougher gun legislation, but congress won't move on it.

the only thing that would ever change anything is if someone shot up congress and the people elected to replace those killed voted for background checks.

DISCLAIMER

---

i am in no way advocating that, by the way....

Dirtie_Frank

U.S. law enforcement officials told The Associated Press that the Navy Yard gunman had been suffering a host of serious mental issues, including paranoia and a sleep disorder. He also had been hearing voices in his head, the officials said. Alexis had been treated since August by the Veterans Administration for his mental problems, the officials said.

http://www.wtop.com/1385/3454545/Gunman ... y-Reserves

Jason P

Reports are that the shooter had a history of documented mental problems.

The handgun he had was taken from a police officer he shot. No report yet on how he obtained the shotgun and AR-15.

edit: echo, echo ....

Jason P

This is all shaping up to be another carefully constructed plot by the government to pass a mandated background check. Halle Beery and John Travolta must be back to no good.

They made it much easier this time. Instead of having to hire 27,650 actors, they only had to hire a shade over 3,000 this time.

gimmesometruth27

voices inside his head...

to paraphrase george carlin, "why do voices always tell people to commit horribly violent acts? why can't a voice tell someone to 'go take a shit on the salad bar at wendy's???'"

Cliffy6745

aerial wrote:

Those that feel less guns mean less crime, would you put a sign in front of your home stating.... this is a
"Gun Free Home"?

1. That is an dumb question
2. All those guns at the Navy Yard did a hell of a job stopping this guy.

Jason P

Cliffy6745 wrote:

2. All those guns at the Navy Yard did a hell of a job stopping this guy.

Kind of kills the idea that arming the teachers will prevent something like this happening considering two of the most recent mass shootings have taken place at US military institutions.

I think the only place with better training and equipment to stop something like this would be a ninja colony.

PJPOWER

Jason P wrote:

Cliffy6745 wrote:

2. All those guns at the Navy Yard did a hell of a job stopping this guy.

Kind of kills the idea that arming the teachers will prevent something like this happening considering two of the most recent mass shootings have taken place at US military institutions.

I think the only place with better training and equipment to stop something like this would be a ninja colony.

Back up a second...wasn't the guy at fort hood stopped by an armed guard? They are saying that this situation also ended when confronted by armed guards. Who is to say the casualty count would not have been a lot higher if not for the heroic actions of armed individuals willing to stand up to them? I don't know about preventing crazy people from doing crazy things, but it at least gives the people in these situations a fighting chance if they cannot get out of the building.

Dirtie_Frank

Jason P wrote:

Cliffy6745 wrote:

2. All those guns at the Navy Yard did a hell of a job stopping this guy.

Kind of kills the idea that arming the teachers will prevent something like this happening considering two of the most recent mass shootings have taken place at US military institutions.

I think the only place with better training and equipment to stop something like this would be a ninja colony.

Accoding to a few articles I have read, then Presidnet Clinton ordered only Military Police or Special Police in the Air Force are authorized to carry weapons on a military installation.

http://www.ehow.com/list_6770093_milita ... -laws.html

So there might be weapons on post, but they are locked in an armory.

PJ_Soul

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

Agreed. Aurora didn't change anything. Newtown didn't change anything. This won't change anything.

if newtown didn't change anything, nothing ever will.

our society of violence is just fucked.

over 90% of americans want tougher gun legislation, but congress won't move on it.

the only thing that would ever change anything is if someone shot up congress and the people elected to replace those killed voted for background checks.

DISCLAIMER

---

i am in no way advocating that, by the way....

Your post just got spit up onto some government guy's screen in DC.

PJ_Soul

PJPOWER wrote:

Jason P wrote:

Cliffy6745 wrote:

2. All those guns at the Navy Yard did a hell of a job stopping this guy.

Kind of kills the idea that arming the teachers will prevent something like this happening considering two of the most recent mass shootings have taken place at US military institutions.

I think the only place with better training and equipment to stop something like this would be a ninja colony.

Back up a second...wasn't the guy at fort hood stopped by an armed guard? They are saying that this situation also ended when confronted by armed guards. Who is to say the casualty count would not have been a lot higher if not for the heroic actions of armed individuals willing to stand up to them? I don't know about preventing crazy people from doing crazy things, but it at least gives the people in these situations a fighting chance if they cannot get out of the building.

You're using Fort Hood of all places to make your argument? Of course there was an armed guard. It was an Army base. :fp: And same goes for the Navy yard. Of course there were armed guards. But the fact that this guy managed to use the guards' guns (supposedly) is meaningful against the argument for arming security guards in public places and schools. If military security at the Naval yard can be disarmed by a shooter and their weapons used against victims, I think that is a strong argument against arming some civilian guard at an elementary school who earns $11 an hour.

PJPOWER

PJ_Soul wrote:

You're using Fort Hood of all places to make your argument? Of course there was an armed guard. It was an Army base. :fp: And same goes for the Navy yard. Of course there were armed guards. But the fact that this guy managed to use the guards' guns (supposedly) is meaningful against the argument for arming security guards in public places and schools. If military security at the Naval yard can be disarmed by a shooter and their weapons used against victims, I think that is a strong argument against arming some civilian guard at an elementary school who earns $11 an hour.

Love the cute face slap, but save it for yourself! You would think "of course there are armed guards", but that's not the truth. It took 5 minutes for armed guards to reach the murderer at Fort Hood, 7 min at the navy yard...why? The answer was in an above post about Billy Blowjob Clinton making based gun free zones. Most if not all of the murders happened before the guards got to him. It is irrelevant where he got his guns as he could have gotten just as easily somewhere else... My point was that these assholes are effectively stopped once there is an armed RESPONSE!

PJ_Soul

PJPOWER wrote:

PJ_Soul wrote:

You're using Fort Hood of all places to make your argument? Of course there was an armed guard. It was an Army base. :fp: And same goes for the Navy yard. Of course there were armed guards. But the fact that this guy managed to use the guards' guns (supposedly) is meaningful against the argument for arming security guards in public places and schools. If military security at the Naval yard can be disarmed by a shooter and their weapons used against victims, I think that is a strong argument against arming some civilian guard at an elementary school who earns $11 an hour.

Love the cute face slap, but save it for yourself! You would think "of course there are armed guards", but that's not the truth. It took 5 minutes for armed guards to reach the murderer at Fort Hood, 7 min at the navy yard...why? The answer was in an above post about Billy Blowjob Clinton making based gun free zones. Most if not all of the murders happened before the guards got to him. It is irrelevant where he got his guns as he could have gotten just as easily somewhere else... My point was that these assholes are effectively stopped once there is an armed RESPONSE!

Then info has been updated since I last checked. The last I knew was that he disarmed the armed guards (when and where they came from is irrelevant to what I'm saying) ... that isn't the case??

unsung

George W Bush is to blame, it's his fault.

PJ_Soul

unsung wrote:

George W Bush is to blame, it's his fault.

If you say so.

:roll:

PJPOWER

From what I've read there was probably an armed guard at a checkpoint somewhere on the perimeter. This guy had worked there and knew exactly where to go. On the inside, people effectively had their ability to protect themselves removed. I fully agree though, we should not rely on armed guards to protect us. And if there is an armed guard, they should probably be somewhere with a barrier or better vantage point than anyone else. I'm one of those nuts that believe people should be able to protect themselves instead of having to wait for law enforcement to arrive. That's a whole new argument though...