Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bull Gator

Gun nutter sttrikes again

Recommended Posts

 

 

Never let an emotionally charged event go to waste...

That is the idea.

We have taken a page from your playbook. Benghazi, IRS, Fast and Furious, AP reporters, etc.

Apologist jackass... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

It is a clear case of workplace violence. Turns out this gun nutter had popped off before.http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/aaron-alexis-navy-yard-shooter-567432

This young man could have been Obama's son.

Jesus on a popcycle stick you are a racist.

You know, you're right, this guy is too black to be Obama's son and for damned sure the big O ain't gonna be claiming him as a possible son.

What does this case have in common with the Trayvon Martin one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Never let an emotionally charged event go to waste...

That is the idea.

We have taken a page from your playbook. Benghazi, IRS, Fast and Furious, AP reporters, etc.

Apologist jackass... :lol:

Quick learners. Once we get your guns, we can start escorting you to the FEMA camps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

perpetual war takes it's toll.... :(

 

Aaron Alexis suffered PTSD, father told police

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/aaron-alexis-suffered-ptsd-father-told-police-1.1856833

 

Thanks Obama/Bush.

The medals in that article are given to anyone that enlists and completes basic.

No mention at all of deployment.

The artice also mentions him as a student of buddhism which makes me wonder if he was looking for a way to control his obvious anger issues.

His last two incidences, according to the article, were over parking and a loud neighbor according to the reporting parties.

Claimed PTSD was not service connected, but rather associated with 9/11 directly.

The guy was certainly unstable, but from all current indications this was workplace violence.

Was he a member of the NRA? Have to wonder if WLP could perhaps provide some information if they have it in thier data bank.

Background checks? uh..yeah claiming to have blacked out in a fit of rage and while doing so unloading a weapon in anger...probly should have been enough to have his right to bear arms removed from him by a judge/jury. Would it have stopped him? not so sure honestly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as civilian concealed carry...why is it no one has a problem with hunters having to pass a class prior to getting licenced, but so many have issues with requiring the same for those who wish to carry for self defense against human beings?

I don't have an issue with conceled carry, but it should be made very clear to those who wish to do so the weight of their decision as well as the legal and moral ramifications should they ever actually have to use thier weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Ahh, yes... the inevitable, idiotic equivalence of mass shootings with automobile accidents...

 

Surprised it took this long...

 

you guys are slacking, you forgot to point out he could have killed just as many today with a knife, or a barbecue fork...

 

Ahh, yes... the inevitable, idiotic response - name calling without addressing the substance of the argument in the slightest.

 

Surprised you resorted to this claptrap so soon.

 

BTW: it's "equating" not "equivalence". Get it right before you use that trite bon mot again.

 

 

Largely a matter of style, I suppose, but I would have thought a grammarian as astute as yourself would have noticed that I was obviously making no effort there to write a complete sentence, which would have properly equired the use of a verb. As such, there is no significant grammatical difference between the use of my noun "equivalence", or your gerund "equating", neither is really more 'correct' than the other, in that instance...

 

"Bon mot", huh? That's cute...

 

Bet you don't hear that one very often at the gun club...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The perp, carrying a shotgun, enters a badged entry, 'gun-free workplace' complete with armed security guards. The perp is shot to death by LEOs and somehow now has a shotgun, a pistol, and an AR-15. Do not even try to use this criminal act to talk about gun control. Shotguns will never be part of the discussion. Talk about mental health issues, talk about a history of violence involving firearms, talk about why there are poorly trained security guards. Knock yourself out.

 

I haven't. you have. The RWNM leads with the "don't even go there" message before we even know if it's a terrorist attack or something else. You're completely unhinged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like it took a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun. Lucky for us we don't listen to asshats like gaytor and call for police to only have pepper spray and tasers.......

 

 

Didja see the post in G/A from this morning? Where one of our anarchists was at the same Navy Yard last week----and the place was covered with 'No Firearms Allowed' signs?....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like it took a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun. Lucky for us we don't listen to asshats like gaytor and call for police to only have pepper spray and tasers.......

 

 

If only we had an Elementary School secretary on the premises. If only....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like it took a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun. Lucky for us we don't listen to asshats like gaytor and call for police to only have pepper spray and tasers.......

it looks like it took a good guy with a gun to turn a bad situation worse, which was then corrected by yet another good guy with a gun. Net-Net - bad guy won.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Sorry, BG's on Ignore. So I don't know what he said, nor care.

 

In a situation like this, I want to 1) Stop the killer (usually with a gun - wielded by good guys), 2) Care for the victims and their families, 3) Put things back to right, and 4) Gird myself for the inevitable assault on guns.

 

Days ago six young lives were snuffed out near here. Yet there was no call for banning the cars, teen-age driver, or alcohol involved in their death. The costs of those bans are rightly seen as far too high for a society. Even though they could "Save Just One Life". Banning guns also has a very high cost to a free society: to the civilian's ability to defend themselves, resist criminals, and practice the freedoms codified in the Bill of Rights. The Naval Yard crime remains the sole responsibility of the perpetrator and perhaps the society that ignored his prior transgressions with a firearm and his rumored mental illness.

Hmm, any calls for banning guns due to this tragedy? No? huh, given the RWNM I would've assumed every liberal pundit out there was saying ban all guns.

Did you not see Diane Feinstein already using this to push her AWB again? There are others as well, but she is the big bad witch of the bunch.

You guys are worried about Diane "granny" Feinstein? What was the last bill she actually originated that became law? Nothing the senate does matters with the house the way it is currently constituted. This is all bluster. Keep fighting the last fight - it's good for the Dems. Makes you look like reactionary asses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Sorry, BG's on Ignore. So I don't know what he said, nor care.

 

In a situation like this, I want to 1) Stop the killer (usually with a gun - wielded by good guys), 2) Care for the victims and their families, 3) Put things back to right, and 4) Gird myself for the inevitable assault on guns.

 

Days ago six young lives were snuffed out near here. Yet there was no call for banning the cars, teen-age driver, or alcohol involved in their death. The costs of those bans are rightly seen as far too high for a society. Even though they could "Save Just One Life". Banning guns also has a very high cost to a free society: to the civilian's ability to defend themselves, resist criminals, and practice the freedoms codified in the Bill of Rights. The Naval Yard crime remains the sole responsibility of the perpetrator and perhaps the society that ignored his prior transgressions with a firearm and his rumored mental illness.

Hmm, any calls for banning guns due to this tragedy? No? huh, given the RWNM I would've assumed every liberal pundit out there was saying ban all guns.

Did you not see Diane Feinstein already using this to push her AWB again? There are others as well, but she is the big bad witch of the bunch.

You guys are worried about Diane "granny" Feinstein? What was the last bill she actually originated that became law? Nothing the senate does matters with the house the way it is currently constituted. This is all bluster. Keep fighting the last fight - it's good for the Dems. Makes you look like reactionary asses.

 

If we could only get the guns out of the hands of law enforcement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as civilian concealed carry...why is it no one has a problem with hunters having to pass a class prior to getting licenced, but so many have issues with requiring the same for those who wish to carry for self defense against human beings?

I don't have an issue with conceled carry, but it should be made very clear to those who wish to do so the weight of their decision as well as the legal and moral ramifications should they ever actually have to use thier weapon.

Please let us know who specifically has a problem with having to pass a class (sic) prior to being licensed for concealed carry, along with some citations so that we can appreciate the context of the claimed issue that your yet-to-be-quoted persons have with those requirements.

 

After that, please explain the relevance of concealed carry as it relates to civilians inside the gun-excluded confines of a Navy base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sorry, BG's on Ignore. So I don't know what he said, nor care.

 

In a situation like this, I want to 1) Stop the killer (usually with a gun - wielded by good guys), 2) Care for the victims and their families, 3) Put things back to right, and 4) Gird myself for the inevitable assault on guns.

 

Days ago six young lives were snuffed out near here. Yet there was no call for banning the cars, teen-age drivers, or alcohol involved in their death. The costs of those bans are rightly seen as far too high to a society. Even though they could "Save Just One Life". Banning guns also has a very high cost to society: to the civilian's ability to defend themselves, resist criminals, and practice the freedoms codified in the Bill of Rights. The Naval Yard crime remains the sole responsibility of the perpetrator and perhaps the society that ignored his prior transgressions with a firearm and his rumored mental illness.

 

Ahh, yes... the inevitable, idiotic equivalence of mass shootings with automobile accidents...

 

Surprised it took this long...

 

you guys are slacking, you forgot to point out he could have killed just as many today with a knife, or a barbecue fork...

 

Jon - if you'll indulge me, I'd like to spend a little time on this point. You game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as civilian concealed carry...why is it no one has a problem with hunters having to pass a class prior to getting licenced, but so many have issues with requiring the same for those who wish to carry for self defense against human beings?

I don't have an issue with conceled carry, but it should be made very clear to those who wish to do so the weight of their decision as well as the legal and moral ramifications should they ever actually have to use thier weapon.

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but, I don't recall hearing anyone take a stand against requiring training as a condition of being issued a concealed carry permit. To the contrary, I think it's an absolute requirement, and am not aware of any state that issues a CCW for which that training isn't required.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As far as civilian concealed carry...why is it no one has a problem with hunters having to pass a class prior to getting licenced, but so many have issues with requiring the same for those who wish to carry for self defense against human beings?

I don't have an issue with conceled carry, but it should be made very clear to those who wish to do so the weight of their decision as well as the legal and moral ramifications should they ever actually have to use thier weapon.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but, I don't recall hearing anyone take a stand against requiring training as a condition of being issued a concealed carry permit. To the contrary, I think it's an absolute requirement, and am not aware of any state that issues a CCW for which that training isn't required.

Required training will lead to having to pass a test. That means restricting the permits. It's a slippery slope. What part of "shall not be infringed" did you miss?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

As far as civilian concealed carry...why is it no one has a problem with hunters having to pass a class prior to getting licenced, but so many have issues with requiring the same for those who wish to carry for self defense against human beings?

I don't have an issue with conceled carry, but it should be made very clear to those who wish to do so the weight of their decision as well as the legal and moral ramifications should they ever actually have to use thier weapon.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but, I don't recall hearing anyone take a stand against requiring training as a condition of being issued a concealed carry permit. To the contrary, I think it's an absolute requirement, and am not aware of any state that issues a CCW for which that training isn't required.

Required training will lead to having to pass a test. That means restricting the permits. It's a slippery slope. What part of "shall not be infringed" did you miss?

 

CCW != being permitted to purchase and own a firearm...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As far as civilian concealed carry...why is it no one has a problem with hunters having to pass a class prior to getting licenced, but so many have issues with requiring the same for those who wish to carry for self defense against human beings?

I don't have an issue with conceled carry, but it should be made very clear to those who wish to do so the weight of their decision as well as the legal and moral ramifications should they ever actually have to use thier weapon.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but, I don't recall hearing anyone take a stand against requiring training as a condition of being issued a concealed carry permit. To the contrary, I think it's an absolute requirement, and am not aware of any state that issues a CCW for which that training isn't required.

PA does not require training, although I often wish it did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

As far as civilian concealed carry...why is it no one has a problem with hunters having to pass a class prior to getting licenced, but so many have issues with requiring the same for those who wish to carry for self defense against human beings?

I don't have an issue with conceled carry, but it should be made very clear to those who wish to do so the weight of their decision as well as the legal and moral ramifications should they ever actually have to use thier weapon.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but, I don't recall hearing anyone take a stand against requiring training as a condition of being issued a concealed carry permit. To the contrary, I think it's an absolute requirement, and am not aware of any state that issues a CCW for which that training isn't required.

PA does not require training, although I often wish it did.

 

Thanks for that, Len - not even for a CCW? VA doesn't require anything more than a background check to purchase, open carry is legal, but CCW requires training + background check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

New York requires training for a premises and range permit. They don't give out CC.

 

Connecticut requires training but every permit is a CC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Training is good, but without testing, how do you know they are properly trained?

And if you test, are you violating rights?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

Training is good, but without testing, how do you know they are properly trained?

And if you test, are you violating rights?

 

I'm all for testing, I'm also for open carry of everything. Give everyone a Beretta 92Fs and an M4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

 

Oh, 12 dead by AR15 and it's just an unfortunate incident. I see...

 

The rifle did this all by itself? I guess the handgun and shotgun were innocent?

 

When you're simple you come to simple conclusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

PA does not require training, although I often wish it did.

Thanks for that, Len - not even for a CCW? VA doesn't require anything more than a background check to purchase, open carry is legal, but CCW requires training + background check.

No training at all. Took me ten minutes to get mine, but that was when I lived in carbon county. The sheriffs are responsible for issuing them, and even though it is a shall issue state, some will push the limits of disqualifying factors. If you don't pay your parking tickets on time in Philly they will deny it, and the. You would have to appeal and fight it. Monroe, where I live now, is tougher than carbon but not as bad as Philly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Training is good, but without testing, how do you know they are properly trained?

And if you test, are you violating rights?

 

I'm all for testing, I'm also for open carry of everything. Give everyone a Beretta 92Fs and an M4.

So you are for infringing on the rights of the people. We don't have test to vote. We don't have a test for speech. Ok, many religions have tests for membership, so that's the exception to prove the rule.

 

The gun is the equalizer. No matter how smart, dumb, or ability, you can have a weapon. A competency test will restrict that.

 

As for open carry, I am for it too. I want to know if you are carrying for my own protection. Conceal carry should be illegal, open carry OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Training is good, but without testing, how do you know they are properly trained?

And if you test, are you violating rights?

 

I'm all for testing, I'm also for open carry of everything. Give everyone a Beretta 92Fs and an M4.

So you are for infringing on the rights of the people. We don't have test to vote. We don't have a test for speech. Ok, many religions have tests for membership, so that's the exception to prove the rule.

 

The gun is the equalizer. No matter how smart, dumb, or ability, you can have a weapon. A competency test will restrict that.

 

As for open carry, I am for it too. I want to know if you are carrying for my own protection. Conceal carry should be illegal, open carry OK.

I actually think that Florida should move to repeal any restrictive gun laws on the books. Let anyone from anywhere buy anything anytime. Good for the economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would testing entail? I would think a three phase approach.

1) Knowledge

2) Competence

3) Tactical

 

The knowledge portion would validate the users understanding of the laws and the safe operation/storage of the weapon. This would be the written portion of the exam.

 

The competence portion would focus on the users ability to discharge the firearm with accuracy and the proper handling of the weapon. This would be the demonstration portion of the exam.

 

The tactical portion would be the most challenging, the user would face shoot/no-shoot scenarios in a high stress environment. Particular attention would be the accuracy of shot placement on the proper targets. This would be the application portion of the exam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

News flash. Man smuggles shot gun into gun free zone created by Bill Clinton surrounded by larger gun free zone (D.C.) shoots M.P. and takes his side arm and AR-15 then kills a shitload of gun free zone employees. Yeah its the AR-15's fault. You fucking people amaze me. You would think that the number one priority in a gun free base would be to make sure no one could get in with a gun. Epic fail on base security. Asshat bought the shotgun 20 days prior with a rap sheet for gun issues. Epic fail of your beloved background checks. Ever think that maybe current laws are lacking plain old enforcement. How did this fuck stick get a security clearance? How did he get someone's id to gain access. How did he get the gun inside? How did he get to buy a gun? Those are the questions that need to be addressed not gun control.

Can we trace the shotgun back to the dealer who sold it? Can we charge that dealer with accessory to murder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

News flash. Man smuggles shot gun into gun free zone created by Bill Clinton surrounded by larger gun free zone (D.C.) shoots M.P. and takes his side arm and AR-15 then kills a shitload of gun free zone employees. Yeah its the AR-15's fault. You fucking people amaze me. You would think that the number one priority in a gun free base would be to make sure no one could get in with a gun. Epic fail on base security. Asshat bought the shotgun 20 days prior with a rap sheet for gun issues. Epic fail of your beloved background checks. Ever think that maybe current laws are lacking plain old enforcement. How did this fuck stick get a security clearance? How did he get someone's id to gain access. How did he get the gun inside? How did he get to buy a gun? Those are the questions that need to be addressed not gun control.

Can we trace the shotgun back to the dealer who sold it? Can we charge that dealer with accessory to murder?

They already know where he bought it. I just dont think that his priors made on NCIC. WHY? If they are on there then hell yeah

Seems like a simple fix then. Stop all gun sales until the holes can be patched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

I agree with you Spatial. Stop all gun sales. While you're at it stop all people driving automobiles because some people are very irresponsible. Let's get that all sorted out first. Hang on, people are irresponsible with their finances, stop all ATM transactions.

 

from Bloomberg (of all places) today.

 

Mass Shootings Fuel Fear, Account for Fraction of Murders
By Annie Linskey - Sep 17, 2013

 

Mass U.S. shootings such as the bloody rampage at the Washington Navy Yard spur safety concerns and garner intense media attention while statistically accounting for few of the total murders reported nationwide.

 

In the 30 years through March, 78 public mass shootings occurred in the U.S. -- incidents in which four or more people were killed at random by a gunman murdering indiscriminately, according to a report issued that month by the Congressional Research Service. These crimes don’t include gang-related killings or domestic disputes where a person slays relatives or other people linked to the murderer.

 

The mass slaughters listed in the report caused the deaths of 547 people. Over the same three decades through 2012, that’s less than a tenth of 1 percent of the 559,347 people the Federal Bureau of Investigation estimates were murdered in America.

“It is a very, very small percentage,” said James Alan Fox, who teaches criminology at Boston’s Northeastern University and co-authored a book about mass shootings called “Extreme Killing,” published in 2011.

 

In the wake of shootings such as the one in Washington that claimed at least 13 lives, including the alleged shooter, “our tendancy is to go overboard and overreach in terms of trying to increase levels of security,” Fox said. “The fear is greater than the risk.”

No ‘Epidemic’

In his research, Fox uses a broader definition of mass killing than the research service report -- he looks at any homicide resulting in four or more deaths, regardless of motive, which includes killings in domestic disputes and robberies gone bad. He reports no increase in mass killings in recent years.

“This is not an epidemic,” he said.

 

In a database of mass killings since 2006 compiled by USA Today, roughly half of all instances where more than four died were motivated by a family dispute of some kind, while 30 percent start as robberies or burglaries. Just 20 percent were the type of public, random killings that occurred in Washington, the newspaper said.

 

Still, such incidents fuel calls for increased security at schools, malls and offices. And some result in calls for tighter regulations on firearms ownership.

 

President Barack Obama pledged to make gun control a second-term priority after 20 children and six educators were shot to death at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, last December. He failed, though, in his push for legislation to expand background checks for gun buyers.

State Laws

A handful of states including Connecticut, New York and Maryland expanded their bans on assault weapons following the Newtown tragedy, and at least 17 other state legislatures moved to tighten gun-control laws.

 

At the same time, 27 states weakened restrictions, including seven that now specify guns are allowed in schools, according to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, a San Francisco-based group that tracks state gun laws.

 

Though mass shootings are rare, police departments are increasingly being trained for them and have changed their recommended response tactics, said Peter Blair, director of research at the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Program at Texas State University in San Marcos.

 

Unlike the handling of the 1999 shootings at Columbine High School outside Denver, first-arriving law enforcement officers are encouraged to enter a building rather than wait for backup. In the Columbine case, the initial responders formed a perimeter outside the school while two students methodically murdered 13 and wounded 24 before killing themselves.

‘Go In Solo’

“Police make an effort to go in and get in quickly,” Blair said. “Police policies around the country now authorize officers to go in solo.”

The average response time by authorities to an active shooting scene is three minutes, Blair said. Still, about half of the massacres are over by the time the police arrive -- usually because the shooters take their own lives, he said.

 

Blair recommends that after first trying to flee, people at a mass shooting may find safety in hiding because the killers tend not to breach locked doors since they know the clock is ticking before police arrive.

 

The last resort is to attack the shooter -- perhaps during reloading, Blair said. That’s when the gunman was tackled to the ground in the January 2011 shooting in Tucson, Arizona, in which six people were killed and 13 wounded, including then-U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords.

Theater Killings

In July 2012, a lone gunman fired into a packed movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, killing 12 and injuring 70 others. At one point, James E. Holmes used a semi-automatic weapon equipped with a 100-round barrel magazine to spray the audience -- shooting until the weapon jammed.

 

This July, lawyers for Holmes said their client was “in the throes of a psychotic episode” when he committed the crime. Holmes has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity; prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.

 

Though the motivation remained unclear for yesterday’s shooting by suspected gunman Aaron Alexis, a former Navy reservist, its occurrence at a military facility sparked recollections of the 2009 shootings at Fort Hood in Texas. Army Maj. Nidal Hasan, who had become radicalized by an al-Qaeda terrorist based in Yeman, killed 13 and wounded more than 30 at a base facility while yelling “Allahu Akbar,” Arabic for God is Great.

 

Hasan, who later said he took aim at the soldiers because he viewed them as a threat to Taliban leaders in Afghanistan, was sentenced to death by a military court on Aug. 28.

Rare Type

A CRS report issued this January identified another jihadist-inspired violent attack in the U.S. in 2009. Carlos Leon Bledsoe, who had taken the name of Abdulhakim Muhammad, shot and killed one soldier and wounded another at the U.S. Army-Navy Career Center in Little Rock, Arkansas. He pleaded guilty and avoided the death penalty.

 

After the report was published, two ethnic Chechen brothers living in America terrorized Boston on April 15 with a jihadist-inspired attack that killed three people and injured more than 200. Following the bombings at the Boston Marathon finish line, one of the brothers shot and killed a Massachusetts Institute of Technology policeman April 18 as they tried to flee the area. Hours later, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, died following a faceoff with law officers. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 20, is in jail awaiting trial.

 

To contact the reporter on this story: Annie Linskey in Boston at alinskey@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Stephen Merelman at smerelman@bloomberg.net

®2013 BLOOMBERG L.P. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only fucking ideologues with an agenda would bring concealed carry or AR-15s into a discussion about a mass shooting that starts with a person with mental health issues and a shotgun who also ends up with a pistol and an AR-15.

 

Your assignment:

  1. list the perps violent incidents around the country that involved a police response
  2. list the number of mental health professionals involved with the perp
  3. without wearing an overcoat,
  • conceal a shotgun,
  • walk into the nearest police station,
  • aim the shotgun at the first armed person you see.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I agree with you Spatial. Stop all gun sales. While you're at it stop all people driving automobiles because some people are very irresponsible. Let's get that all sorted out first. Hang on, people are irresponsible with their finances, stop all ATM transactions.

 

from Bloomberg (of all places) today.

 

Mass Shootings Fuel Fear, Account for Fraction of Murders
By Annie Linskey - Sep 17, 2013

 

Mass U.S. shootings such as the bloody rampage at the Washington Navy Yard spur safety concerns and garner intense media attention while statistically accounting for few of the total murders reported nationwide.

 

In the 30 years through March, 78 public mass shootings occurred in the U.S. -- incidents in which four or more people were killed at random by a gunman murdering indiscriminately, according to a report issued that month by the Congressional Research Service. These crimes don’t include gang-related killings or domestic disputes where a person slays relatives or other people linked to the murderer.

 

The mass slaughters listed in the report caused the deaths of 547 people. Over the same three decades through 2012, that’s less than a tenth of 1 percent of the 559,347 people the Federal Bureau of Investigation estimates were murdered in America.

“It is a very, very small percentage,” said James Alan Fox, who teaches criminology at Boston’s Northeastern University and co-authored a book about mass shootings called “Extreme Killing,” published in 2011.

 

...

 

 

To contact the reporter on this story: Annie Linskey in Boston at alinskey@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Stephen Merelman at smerelman@bloomberg.net

®2013 BLOOMBERG L.P. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

 

At times like this, it's always comforting to be reminded that mass shootings only account for a tiny percentage of the rate of murder by firearms in a nation that outpaces the rest of the developed world in that category to such a remarkable extent...

 

 

firearm-OECD-UN-data3.jpg

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/14/chart-the-u-s-has-far-more-gun-related-killings-than-any-other-developed-country/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon,

 

Why do you care what the implement of the murder is? Shouldn't total murder rate be the measure by which we compare ourselves to other countries?

 

In other news, there are significantly more Ford-related automobile accidents in the USA than in any other country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Looks like Feinstein tripped over her dick again.

 

Obama looks good though. He promised us that the perpetrator would be held responsible after he was already dead.

 

Biden, however, is the new posterboy for the NRA for encouraging this act of violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did they leave out Mexico? What the fuck is going on in Chile? I think Shitcago makes up most of that graph

 

Actually, there are 40 cities in the US with populations of 40,000+ that have a higher per capita murder rate than Chicago...

 

But, carry on...

 

 

Despite the familiar media refrain that Chicago is the nation’s murder capital, the “windy city” does not even qualify as one of the nation’s top 25 most dangerous cities for homicide. Yes, in sheer numbers Chicago leads the nation’s cities in murders, but its per capita murder rate is lower than forty other cities with populations above 40,000 residents. In 2011, the last year where records have been tabulated to compare cities, according to FBI statistics, Chicago, with a per capita murder rate of 15.9/per 100,000 residents, ranked behind over three dozen other American cities.

 

In 2011, the city’s murder rate was less than half that of the cities of New Orleans (57.6/per 100,00), Detroit (48.2) and St. Louis (35.3). Chicago’s homicide rate was also lower than such unremarkable cities as Ft. Myers, FL (31.7) Pine Bluff, AR (24.3), Dayton, OH (23.3) Rocky Mount, NC (20.6), Gulfport, MS (17.6) and Harrisburg, PA (16.1). Although Chicago has a reputation for being a deadly city, a resident’s odds of being murdered there in a given year are about 1 in 6250. By comparison, a New Orleans resident has roughly a 1 in 1750 chance of being killed in a homicide over a twelve month period. Thus, a New Orleans resident is more than three times as likely to become a murder victim in his hometown than a resident of Chicago.

 

Gun control opponents have often seized on Chicago as their example to “prove” that gun control is a total failure, by repeating the false claim that it has the nation’s highest murder rate. While Chicago is indeed a relatively violent city, the fact that it ranks behind a number of other cities with more relaxed gun laws, at least calls into question the logic of that argument. In addition, it should be noted that Chicago’s record year for homicides was 1974 when they had 970 murders, well above the total of 506 recorded last year.

 

Chicago’s strict hand gun ban was passed in 1982, so given that the number of homicides has dropped in half from 1974 to 2012, it is hard to take seriously the argument that the gun ban has made matters worse for the residents of Chicago. The decline in homicide rates in Chicago coincided with a corresponding drop nationwide, so gun laws are not necessarily the primary reason for the lower homicide rate, but clearly the city’s gun laws have not exacerbated the city’s homicide problem. In fact, the city’s police department reported that the first quarter of 2013, was the least deadly for homicide in fifty years. Chicago’s murder rate through the first quarter of 2013 was the lowest it has been since 1963.

 

Although news agencies and blogs continue to report 2012 as a “record homicide year” for Chicago, and they also continue to falsely claim that Chicago has the highest “murder rate” in the country, both those claims are demonstrably false. Chicago’s homicide rate even in the deadly year of 2012 was lower than every year from 1991 to 2003. While, Chicago remains a dangerous city for homicides, statistically it is still safer than forty other American cities. If this nation is to engage in a debate about the merits or shortcomings of Chicago’s gun laws, they should at least begin from a foundation of truth, and not use a series of myths upon which to base their arguments.

 

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/07/11/chicagos-homicide-rate-rank-top-american-cities.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Why did they leave out Mexico? What the fuck is going on in Chile? I think Shitcago makes up most of that graph

 

Actually, there are 40 cities in the US with populations of 40,000+ that have a higher per capita murder rate than Chicago...

 

But, carry on...

 

>

Despite the familiar media refrain that Chicago is the nation’s murder capital, the “windy city” does not even qualify as one of the nation’s top 25 most dangerous cities for homicide. Yes, in sheer numbers Chicago leads the nation’s cities in murders, but its per capita murder rate is lower than forty other cities with populations above 40,000 residents. In 2011, the last year where records have been tabulated to compare cities, according to FBI statistics, Chicago, with a per capita murder rate of 15.9/per 100,000 residents, ranked behind over three dozen other American cities.

 

In 2011, the city’s murder rate was less than half that of the cities of New Orleans (57.6/per 100,00), Detroit (48.2) and St. Louis (35.3). Chicago’s homicide rate was also lower than such unremarkable cities as Ft. Myers, FL (31.7) Pine Bluff, AR (24.3), Dayton, OH (23.3) Rocky Mount, NC (20.6), Gulfport, MS (17.6) and Harrisburg, PA (16.1). Although Chicago has a reputation for being a deadly city, a resident’s odds of being murdered there in a given year are about 1 in 6250. By comparison, a New Orleans resident has roughly a 1 in 1750 chance of being killed in a homicide over a twelve month period. Thus, a New Orleans resident is more than three times as likely to become a murder victim in his hometown than a resident of Chicago.

 

Gun control opponents have often seized on Chicago as their example to “prove” that gun control is a total failure, by repeating the false claim that it has the nation’s highest murder rate. While Chicago is indeed a relatively violent city, the fact that it ranks behind a number of other cities with more relaxed gun laws, at least calls into question the logic of that argument. In addition, it should be noted that Chicago’s record year for homicides was 1974 when they had 970 murders, well above the total of 506 recorded last year.

 

Chicago’s strict hand gun ban was passed in 1982, so given that the number of homicides has dropped in half from 1974 to 2012, it is hard to take seriously the argument that the gun ban has made matters worse for the residents of Chicago. The decline in homicide rates in Chicago coincided with a corresponding drop nationwide, so gun laws are not necessarily the primary reason for the lower homicide rate, but clearly the city’s gun laws have not exacerbated the city’s homicide problem. In fact, the city’s police department reported that the first quarter of 2013, was the least deadly for homicide in fifty years. Chicago’s murder rate through the first quarter of 2013 was the lowest it has been since 1963.

 

Although news agencies and blogs continue to report 2012 as a “record homicide year” for Chicago, and they also continue to falsely claim that Chicago has the highest “murder rate” in the country, both those claims are demonstrably false. Chicago’s homicide rate even in the deadly year of 2012 was lower than every year from 1991 to 2003. While, Chicago remains a dangerous city for homicides, statistically it is still safer than forty other American cities. If this nation is to engage in a debate about the merits or shortcomings of Chicago’s gun laws, they should at least begin from a foundation of truth, and not use a series of myths upon which to base their arguments.

 

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/07/11/chicagos-homicide-rate-rank-top-american-cities.html

 

Oh just shut up with your stupid facts. What use is a good alternate ID if you can't use it to spout nonsensical fantasy? It works on the radio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

It looks like it took a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun. Lucky for us we don't listen to asshats like gaytor and call for police to only have pepper spray and tasers.......

it looks like it took a good guy with a gun to turn a bad situation worse, which was then corrected by yet another good guy with a gun. Net-Net - bad guy won.

 

 

What's your solution then? What would have prevented this? Honest question......

Sounds like yanking this guys guns after some of his altercations with local law enforcement would've been a good start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

News flash. Man smuggles shot gun into gun free zone created by Bill Clinton surrounded by larger gun free zone (D.C.) shoots M.P. and takes his side arm and AR-15 then kills a shitload of gun free zone employees. Yeah its the AR-15's fault. You fucking people amaze me. You would think that the number one priority in a gun free base would be to make sure no one could get in with a gun. Epic fail on base security. Asshat bought the shotgun 20 days prior with a rap sheet for gun issues. Epic fail of your beloved background checks. Ever think that maybe current laws are lacking plain old enforcement. How did this fuck stick get a security clearance? How did he get someone's id to gain access. How did he get the gun inside? How did he get to buy a gun? Those are the questions that need to be addressed not gun control.

Can we trace the shotgun back to the dealer who sold it? Can we charge that dealer with accessory to murder?

If said Dealer purposely circumvented background checks, I'd say yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

News flash. Man smuggles shot gun into gun free zone created by Bill Clinton surrounded by larger gun free zone (D.C.) shoots M.P. and takes his side arm and AR-15 then kills a shitload of gun free zone employees. Yeah its the AR-15's fault. You fucking people amaze me. You would think that the number one priority in a gun free base would be to make sure no one could get in with a gun. Epic fail on base security. Asshat bought the shotgun 20 days prior with a rap sheet for gun issues. Epic fail of your beloved background checks. Ever think that maybe current laws are lacking plain old enforcement. How did this fuck stick get a security clearance? How did he get someone's id to gain access. How did he get the gun inside? How did he get to buy a gun? Those are the questions that need to be addressed not gun control.

Can we trace the shotgun back to the dealer who sold it? Can we charge that dealer with accessory to murder?

They already know where he bought it. I just dont think that his priors made on NCIC. WHY? If they are on there then hell yeah

Seems like a simple fix then. Stop all gun sales until the holes can be patched.

I dont see how its possible to fix history of someone from 10 years ago but going forward needs to be looked at. Anyone that commits a gun crime other than something like shooting one too many ducks shoud have that as an event that stops a gun sale. States should be required to update the data base. Same for mental illness. I don't think anyone would argue those points. Problem is the grabbers always have to pander to their base and add in a bunch of crap laws that dont do anything other than punish the average Joe.

 

Back in Minnesota, the old joke was poaching was penalized more than murder - In Minnesota if you poach fish they can take your boat. I would bet they can yank your guns as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any idiot knows that chemical weapons in Syria pose a far greater threat to Americans than psychos with guns right here at home do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't one of the background-checks-for-mental laws have an exclusion for military personnel?

 

No, it is the opposite of that. There are additional possible prohibitions for military and discharged military.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

again we have more problems here than abroad. Cut all aid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Sorry, BG's on Ignore. So I don't know what he said, nor care.

 

In a situation like this, I want to 1) Stop the killer (usually with a gun - wielded by good guys), 2) Care for the victims and their families, 3) Put things back to right, and 4) Gird myself for the inevitable assault on guns.

 

Days ago six young lives were snuffed out near here. Yet there was no call for banning the cars, teen-age drivers, or alcohol involved in their death. The costs of those bans are rightly seen as far too high to a society. Even though they could "Save Just One Life". Banning guns also has a very high cost to society: to the civilian's ability to defend themselves, resist criminals, and practice the freedoms codified in the Bill of Rights. The Naval Yard crime remains the sole responsibility of the perpetrator and perhaps the society that ignored his prior transgressions with a firearm and his rumored mental illness.

 

Ahh, yes... the inevitable, idiotic equivalence of mass shootings with automobile accidents...

 

Surprised it took this long...

 

you guys are slacking, you forgot to point out he could have killed just as many today with a knife, or a barbecue fork...

 

Jon - if you'll indulge me, I'd like to spend a little time on this point. You game?

BUMP - Mr. Eisberg?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Navy Yard shooter was clearly Double AA Grade crazy for a long time. In and out of mental treatment, with two VERY questionable misuses of a firearm. Yet no-one did anything about him! The Virginia Tech, Aurora, and Sandy hook shooters were much the same. Mentally ill -- and ignored.

 

You want to tell me how well your vaunted universal background checks and gun control schemes work now?

 

It's an observable fact that firearms in the hands of good people are no problem. While the bad, angry, crazy or stupid can get them easier, quicker, and cheaper than the law-abiding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Navy Yard shooter was clearly Double AA Grade crazy for a long time. In and out of mental treatment, with two VERY questionable misuses of a firearm. Yet no-one did anything about him! The Virginia Tech, Aurora, and Sandy hook shooters were much the same. Mentally ill -- and ignored.

 

You want to tell me how well your vaunted universal background checks and gun control schemes work now?

 

It's an observable fact that firearms in the hands of good people are no problem. While the bad, angry, crazy or stupid can get them easier, quicker, and cheaper than the law-abiding.

FIrst off, we need to be able to identify dangerous people from getting guns. This requires some sort of validation before purchase. The filter. This is where UBS is used to catch them in the filter.

However, the gun lobby doesn't want us to classify people into dangerous and not dangerous groups. Nor do they want that designation to be used to stop purchases.

 

We need UBS. We need to classify people requesting guns. And we need to be able to trace guns back through the chain of custody to punish those who do not following the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The Navy Yard shooter was clearly Double AA Grade crazy for a long time. In and out of mental treatment, with two VERY questionable misuses of a firearm. Yet no-one did anything about him! The Virginia Tech, Aurora, and Sandy hook shooters were much the same. Mentally ill -- and ignored.

 

You want to tell me how well your vaunted universal background checks and gun control schemes work now?

 

It's an observable fact that firearms in the hands of good people are no problem. While the bad, angry, crazy or stupid can get them easier, quicker, and cheaper than the law-abiding.

FIrst off, we need to be able to identify dangerous people from getting guns. This requires some sort of validation before purchase. The filter. This is where UBS is used to catch them in the filter.

However, the gun lobby doesn't want us to classify people into dangerous and not dangerous groups. Nor do they want that designation to be used to stop purchases.

 

We need UBS. We need to classify people requesting guns. And we need to be able to trace guns back through the chain of custody to punish those who do not following the process.

 

Newtown. The kid killed his mother and stole the guns

 

Navy Yard. The shooter killed the cops and stole their guns.

 

Your inane suggestions would have done zip, zero, nada, nothing in either of those two shooting incidents.

 

Try again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The Navy Yard shooter was clearly Double AA Grade crazy for a long time. In and out of mental treatment, with two VERY questionable misuses of a firearm. Yet no-one did anything about him! The Virginia Tech, Aurora, and Sandy hook shooters were much the same. Mentally ill -- and ignored.

 

You want to tell me how well your vaunted universal background checks and gun control schemes work now?

 

It's an observable fact that firearms in the hands of good people are no problem. While the bad, angry, crazy or stupid can get them easier, quicker, and cheaper than the law-abiding.

FIrst off, we need to be able to identify dangerous people from getting guns. This requires some sort of validation before purchase. The filter. This is where UBS is used to catch them in the filter.

However, the gun lobby doesn't want us to classify people into dangerous and not dangerous groups. Nor do they want that designation to be used to stop purchases.

 

We need UBS. We need to classify people requesting guns. And we need to be able to trace guns back through the chain of custody to punish those who do not following the process.

 

Ya know what, SE - taken at face value, I could actually agree with you. The problem for those of us who treasure our rights is this: Our government, especially the enforcement arms of government, have demonstrated a propensity to stretch authority, and applicable circumstances for that authority well beyond the initial intent of the legislation that provided them that authority. I'm not gonna search for who said it, but, MANY on the gun-grabbing side have said that their intent is to establish a foothold from which they can reach even higher to enact more restrictions.

 

With that kind of rhetoric, often and publicly repeated, is it a wonder that people react in an adversarial manner to MORE proposed restrictions? I actually think that it was BadLat who said a few weeks ago that if anyone expects rights-advocates to seriously consider ANY infringement, that establishing the value of that infringement and the guarantee that the infringement won't be misapplied lies with those who are advocating that infringement.

 

That kind of talk, sir, will do a lot more to further discussion than the threats that rights preservationists are constantly deflecting from folks who talk like you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn Guy, VERY well stated.

 

To repeatedly beat this zombified horse: the EXISTING laws didn't work because the societal system was too afraid, uncaring, or lazy to call a nutcase a nutcase.

 

So the solution is to have more of the same? Sorry, no. Our Rights are not to be taken at a whim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn Guy, VERY well stated.

 

To repeatedly beat this zombified horse: the EXISTING laws didn't work because the societal system was too afraid, uncaring, or lazy to call a nutcase a nutcase.

 

So the solution is to have more of the same? Sorry, no. Our Rights are not to be taken at a whim.

 

Thanks CF - remember that in Specious's case - that he advocated subjugating the rights of the individual for the comfort of the majority. Put another way - while I may absolutely HATE an individual like the Westboro Kooks - I've spent my adult life doing things to defend their right to be as offensive as they want to be. That doesn't mean that I haven't exercised my own right to park my motorcycle and stand wherever I want to, with a bunch of other like-minded individuals, to deprive the WBC Kooks of the disruption and attention they desire.

 

How's this relate? I didn't seek to deprive WBC of their right to say whatever they felt. Their rights DON'T preclude their hearing what others think of THEM for their behavior, nor do their rights provide free and easy access to the innocent targets of their ire. Another point: The protection of and insulation from those goofs weren't provided by the cops, nor any other government entity - it was provided by people who heard, and cared enough to do something about it.

 

The action of caring people is what we're lacking, IMHO - and what I'd like to see more of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Navy Yard shooter was clearly Double AA Grade crazy for a long time. In and out of mental treatment, with two VERY questionable misuses of a firearm. Yet no-one did anything about him! The Virginia Tech, Aurora, and Sandy hook shooters were much the same. Mentally ill -- and ignored.

 

You want to tell me how well your vaunted universal background checks and gun control schemes work now?

 

It's an observable fact that firearms in the hands of good people are no problem. While the bad, angry, crazy or stupid can get them easier, quicker, and cheaper than the law-abiding.

 

Actually, according to the NY TIMES, it appears that a particular provision of Virginia gun legislation may have prevented this most recent mass shooting from being much worse than it was...

 

WASHINGTON — The gunman who killed 12 people at the Washington Navy Yard on Monday test-fired an AR-15 assault rifle at a Virginia gun store last week but was stopped from buying one because state law there prohibits the sale of such weapons to out-of-state buyers, according to two senior law enforcement officials.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/18/us/state-law-stopped-gunman-from-buying-rifle-officials-say.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The Navy Yard shooter was clearly Double AA Grade crazy for a long time. In and out of mental treatment, with two VERY questionable misuses of a firearm. Yet no-one did anything about him! The Virginia Tech, Aurora, and Sandy hook shooters were much the same. Mentally ill -- and ignored.

 

You want to tell me how well your vaunted universal background checks and gun control schemes work now?

 

It's an observable fact that firearms in the hands of good people are no problem. While the bad, angry, crazy or stupid can get them easier, quicker, and cheaper than the law-abiding.

FIrst off, we need to be able to identify dangerous people from getting guns. This requires some sort of validation before purchase. The filter. This is where UBS is used to catch them in the filter.

However, the gun lobby doesn't want us to classify people into dangerous and not dangerous groups. Nor do they want that designation to be used to stop purchases.

 

We need UBS. We need to classify people requesting guns. And we need to be able to trace guns back through the chain of custody to punish those who do not following the process.

 

Newtown. The kid killed his mother and stole the guns. where guns stored according to the law?

 

Navy Yard. The shooter killed the cops and stole their guns. was the shooter legally allowed to own a gun?

 

Your inane suggestions would have done zip, zero, nada, nothing in either of those two shooting incidents.

 

Try again.

i tend to agree that illegally obtaining weapons is an option for some. as it an result of lax law enforcement, i don't think it has relevance.

 

unless you want to argue that any new laws would suffer the same fate.............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

As far as civilian concealed carry...why is it no one has a problem with hunters having to pass a class prior to getting licenced, but so many have issues with requiring the same for those who wish to carry for self defense against human beings?

I don't have an issue with conceled carry, but it should be made very clear to those who wish to do so the weight of their decision as well as the legal and moral ramifications should they ever actually have to use thier weapon.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but, I don't recall hearing anyone take a stand against requiring training as a condition of being issued a concealed carry permit. To the contrary, I think it's an absolute requirement, and am not aware of any state that issues a CCW for which that training isn't required.

Alaska for one, busy at work at the moment. Will do some searching later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The Navy Yard shooter was clearly Double AA Grade crazy for a long time. In and out of mental treatment, with two VERY questionable misuses of a firearm. Yet no-one did anything about him! The Virginia Tech, Aurora, and Sandy hook shooters were much the same. Mentally ill -- and ignored.

 

You want to tell me how well your vaunted universal background checks and gun control schemes work now?

 

It's an observable fact that firearms in the hands of good people are no problem. While the bad, angry, crazy or stupid can get them easier, quicker, and cheaper than the law-abiding.

 

Actually, according to the NY TIMES, it appears that a particular provision of Virginia gun legislation may have prevented this most recent mass shooting from being much worse than it was...

 

>WASHINGTON — The gunman who killed 12 people at the Washington Navy Yard on Monday test-fired an AR-15 assault rifle at a Virginia gun store last week but was stopped from buying one because state law there prohibits the sale of such weapons to out-of-state buyers, according to two senior law enforcement officials.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/18/us/state-law-stopped-gunman-from-buying-rifle-officials-say.html

 

 

Uhhhh, Jon, he did use an AR-15 in the shooting and an autoloading pistol with a magazine that holds more than ten rounds.

 

The VA law did absolutely nothing to stop him from acquiring those weapons using a perfectly legal shotgun that, most likely, still had the duck plug in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Actually, according to the NY TIMES, it appears that a particular provision of Virginia gun legislation may have prevented this most recent mass shooting from being much worse than it was...

 

>WASHINGTON — The gunman who killed 12 people at the Washington Navy Yard on Monday test-fired an AR-15 assault rifle at a Virginia gun store last week but was stopped from buying one because state law there prohibits the sale of such weapons to out-of-state buyers, according to two senior law enforcement officials.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/18/us/state-law-stopped-gunman-from-buying-rifle-officials-say.html

 

 

Uhhhh, Jon, he did use an AR-15 in the shooting and an autoloading pistol with a magazine that holds more than ten rounds.

 

The VA law did absolutely nothing to stop him from acquiring those weapons using a perfectly legal shotgun that, most likely, still had the duck plug in it.

 

Not according to the FBI as of Tuesday afternoon...

 

The FBI said there is no indication that an AR-15 was used in the shooting rampage at the Washington Navy Yard, despite wide initial reports that gunman Aaron Alexis was armed with one when he murdered 12 people Monday.

 

“At this time we believe that Mr. Alexis entered Building 197 at the Navy Yard with a shotgun. We do not have any information at this time that he had an AR-15 in his possession,” Valerie Parlave, assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Washington field office, said at a news conference Tuesday. Officials said Alexis also took at least one handgun from a law officer.

 

he FBI’s confirmation came after CNN reported Tuesday morning that the initial reports that the shooter used an AR-15 may have been incorrect:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/17/cnn-ar-15-may-not-have-been-used-in-navy-yard-shooting-after-all/

 

[F]ederal law enforcement sources told CNN Tuesday that authorities have recovered three weapons from the scene of the mass shooting, including one — a shotgun — that investigators believe Alexis brought in to the compound. The other two weapons, which sources say were handguns, may have been taken from guards at the Navy complex.

 

The sources, who have detailed knowledge of the investigation, cautioned that initial information that an AR-15 was used in the shootings may have been incorrect. It is believed that Alexis had rented an AR-15, but returned it before Monday morning’s shootings. Authorities are still investigating precisely how many weapons Alexis had access to and when.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

As far as civilian concealed carry...why is it no one has a problem with hunters having to pass a class prior to getting licenced, but so many have issues with requiring the same for those who wish to carry for self defense against human beings?

I don't have an issue with conceled carry, but it should be made very clear to those who wish to do so the weight of their decision as well as the legal and moral ramifications should they ever actually have to use thier weapon.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but, I don't recall hearing anyone take a stand against requiring training as a condition of being issued a concealed carry permit. To the contrary, I think it's an absolute requirement, and am not aware of any state that issues a CCW for which that training isn't required.

Alaska for one, busy at work at the moment. Will do some searching later.

 

It's called Constitutional Carry, and five states have it: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont and Wyoming (for residents).

 

BTW: There's been very little problem with unrestricted CCWs. In fact I believe that crime has gone down in all the states allowing Constitutional Carry. I do know that CCWers are more law abiding than even the police. Overall, they're good, safe, solid, responsible citizens. Not the gunslingers the fearful imagine.

 

That being said, I believe that everyone with a gun (CCW or not) should get recurring training. It's a responsible part of a citizen exercising their Rights. I just don't believe the states or the Feds should be in the position of restricting those Rights - if they do that, they're no longer Rights, but privileges granted (often hesitantly, jealously) by the state. Full Disclosure: I'm an NRA Certified Instructor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

As far as civilian concealed carry...why is it no one has a problem with hunters having to pass a class prior to getting licenced, but so many have issues with requiring the same for those who wish to carry for self defense against human beings?

I don't have an issue with conceled carry, but it should be made very clear to those who wish to do so the weight of their decision as well as the legal and moral ramifications should they ever actually have to use thier weapon.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but, I don't recall hearing anyone take a stand against requiring training as a condition of being issued a concealed carry permit. To the contrary, I think it's an absolute requirement, and am not aware of any state that issues a CCW for which that training isn't required.

Alaska for one, busy at work at the moment. Will do some searching later.

 

It's called Constitutional Carry, and five states have it: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont and Wyoming (for residents).

 

BTW: There's been very little problem with unrestricted CCWs. In fact I believe that crime has gone down in all the states allowing Constitutional Carry. I do know that CCWers are more law abiding than even the police. Overall, they're good, safe, solid, responsible citizens. Not the gunslingers the fearful imagine.

 

That being said, I believe that everyone with a gun (CCW or not) should get recurring training. It's a responsible part of a citizen exercising their Rights. I just don't believe the states or the Feds should be in the position of restricting those Rights - if they do that, they're no longer Rights, but privileges granted (often hesitantly, jealously) by the state. Full Disclosure: I'm an NRA Certified Instructor.

i have no doubt that this is the case. and the way it is written gave me a laugh.

 

law abiding citizens, be they ccw holders, or the police are not the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reality is that murders per thousand people have declined, even in places with few restrictions on guns. Another reality is that the decline has been most pronounced when examining handguns used in murders. Another reality is that the plural of anecdote is not data. Another one is that I could post self defense stories every day, but I don't. Lots of realities to deal with.

 

Flfirearmmurders.gif

 

Since I moved to Florida in 1990 the murder rate has fallen by 50%.

 

You're welcome Florida.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Actually, according to the NY TIMES, it appears that a particular provision of Virginia gun legislation may have prevented this most recent mass shooting from being much worse than it was...

 

>WASHINGTON — The gunman who killed 12 people at the Washington Navy Yard on Monday test-fired an AR-15 assault rifle at a Virginia gun store last week but was stopped from buying one because state law there prohibits the sale of such weapons to out-of-state buyers, according to two senior law enforcement officials.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/18/us/state-law-stopped-gunman-from-buying-rifle-officials-say.html

 

 

Uhhhh, Jon, he did use an AR-15 in the shooting and an autoloading pistol with a magazine that holds more than ten rounds.

 

The VA law did absolutely nothing to stop him from acquiring those weapons using a perfectly legal shotgun that, most likely, still had the duck plug in it.

 

Not according to the FBI as of Tuesday afternoon...

 

>The FBI said there is no indication that an AR-15 was used in the shooting rampage at the Washington Navy Yard, despite wide initial reports that gunman Aaron Alexis was armed with one when he murdered 12 people Monday.

 

“At this time we believe that Mr. Alexis entered Building 197 at the Navy Yard with a shotgun. We do not have any information at this time that he had an AR-15 in his possession,” Valerie Parlave, assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Washington field office, said at a news conference Tuesday. Officials said Alexis also took at least one handgun from a law officer.

 

he FBI’s confirmation came after CNN reported Tuesday morning that the initial reports that the shooter used an AR-15 may have been incorrect:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/17/cnn-ar-15-may-not-have-been-used-in-navy-yard-shooting-after-all/

[F]ederal law enforcement sources told CNN Tuesday that authorities have recovered three weapons from the scene of the mass shooting, including one — a shotgun — that investigators believe Alexis brought in to the compound. The other two weapons, which sources say were handguns, may have been taken from guards at the Navy complex.

 

The sources, who have detailed knowledge of the investigation, cautioned that initial information that an AR-15 was used in the shootings may have been incorrect. It is believed that Alexis had rented an AR-15, but returned it before Monday morning’s shootings. Authorities are still investigating precisely how many weapons Alexis had access to and when.

 

 

Earlier reports had him killing the guard and taking weapons from the guard. The AR-15 and Pistol were originally identified. He used the shotgun to acquire the weapons in a area not subject to VA law and, by killing the guard, acquired them in the same manner as the Newtown shooter, illegally. The law had no bearing and, no matter how stringent, would have done nothing. I see that they are now saying no AR-15. I guess I missed that since every station on radio and TV were touting NEW information on the shooting to the point that it became background noise.

 

If he didn't acquire an AR-15, then the pistol would be more than adequate to kill 12 unarmed people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Sorry, BG's on Ignore. So I don't know what he said, nor care.

 

In a situation like this, I want to 1) Stop the killer (usually with a gun - wielded by good guys), 2) Care for the victims and their families, 3) Put things back to right, and 4) Gird myself for the inevitable assault on guns.

 

Days ago six young lives were snuffed out near here. Yet there was no call for banning the cars, teen-age drivers, or alcohol involved in their death. The costs of those bans are rightly seen as far too high to a society. Even though they could "Save Just One Life". Banning guns also has a very high cost to society: to the civilian's ability to defend themselves, resist criminals, and practice the freedoms codified in the Bill of Rights. The Naval Yard crime remains the sole responsibility of the perpetrator and perhaps the society that ignored his prior transgressions with a firearm and his rumored mental illness.

 

Ahh, yes... the inevitable, idiotic equivalence of mass shootings with automobile accidents...

 

Surprised it took this long...

 

you guys are slacking, you forgot to point out he could have killed just as many today with a knife, or a barbecue fork...

 

Jon - if you'll indulge me, I'd like to spend a little time on this point. You game?

BUMP - Mr. Eisberg?

 

Well, I'm long past weary of hearing the refrain in the wake of these incidents things like "So, why isn't anyone calling for banning automobiles, knives, pressure cookers, jet skis, baseball bats...", or any other conceivable implement that may have killed someone somewhere along the line...

 

However, if you feel you have some new, unexplored take on the matter, knock yourself out...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I see that they are now saying no AR-15. I guess I missed that since every station on radio and TV were touting NEW information on the shooting to the point that it became background noise.

 

If he didn't acquire an AR-15, then the pistol would be more than adequate to kill 12 unarmed people.

 

There was NO AR-15!

 

That's been said and agreed to. The pistol was probably a better choice anyway in the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I see that they are now saying no AR-15. I guess I missed that since every station on radio and TV were touting NEW information on the shooting to the point that it became background noise.

 

If he didn't acquire an AR-15, then the pistol would be more than adequate to kill 12 unarmed people.

 

There was NO AR-15!

Correct, that was blocked by a useless gun law that actually worked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I see that they are now saying no AR-15. I guess I missed that since every station on radio and TV were touting NEW information on the shooting to the point that it became background noise.

 

If he didn't acquire an AR-15, then the pistol would be more than adequate to kill 12 unarmed people.

 

There was NO AR-15!

Correct, that was blocked by a useless gun law that actually worked.

 

No. It wasn't. See above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

As far as civilian concealed carry...why is it no one has a problem with hunters having to pass a class prior to getting licenced, but so many have issues with requiring the same for those who wish to carry for self defense against human beings?

I don't have an issue with conceled carry, but it should be made very clear to those who wish to do so the weight of their decision as well as the legal and moral ramifications should they ever actually have to use thier weapon.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but, I don't recall hearing anyone take a stand against requiring training as a condition of being issued a concealed carry permit. To the contrary, I think it's an absolute requirement, and am not aware of any state that issues a CCW for which that training isn't required.

Alaska for one, busy at work at the moment. Will do some searching later.

 

Thank you Sir - Len corrected me as well w/r/t PA not requiring proof of training.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I see that they are now saying no AR-15. I guess I missed that since every station on radio and TV were touting NEW information on the shooting to the point that it became background noise.

 

If he didn't acquire an AR-15, then the pistol would be more than adequate to kill 12 unarmed people.

 

There was NO AR-15!

Correct, that was blocked by a useless gun law that actually worked.

 

I keep seeing this mentioned, but I have not seen the text of the law anywhere. I know that handguns are treated differently for non-residents by federal law, but have not seen anything regarding semi auto rifles. Could you post a link to the law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon,

 

Why do you care what the implement of the murder is? Shouldn't total murder rate be the measure by which we compare ourselves to other countries?

 

In other news, there are significantly more Ford-related automobile accidents in the USA than in any other country.

Jon, I feel pretty strongly that the statistic of "gun-related murders" is not particularly relevant when we can look at the statistic of "murders."

 

Your thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Sorry, BG's on Ignore. So I don't know what he said, nor care.

 

In a situation like this, I want to 1) Stop the killer (usually with a gun - wielded by good guys), 2) Care for the victims and their families, 3) Put things back to right, and 4) Gird myself for the inevitable assault on guns.

 

Days ago six young lives were snuffed out near here. Yet there was no call for banning the cars, teen-age drivers, or alcohol involved in their death. The costs of those bans are rightly seen as far too high to a society. Even though they could "Save Just One Life". Banning guns also has a very high cost to society: to the civilian's ability to defend themselves, resist criminals, and practice the freedoms codified in the Bill of Rights. The Naval Yard crime remains the sole responsibility of the perpetrator and perhaps the society that ignored his prior transgressions with a firearm and his rumored mental illness.

 

Ahh, yes... the inevitable, idiotic equivalence of mass shootings with automobile accidents...

 

Surprised it took this long...

 

you guys are slacking, you forgot to point out he could have killed just as many today with a knife, or a barbecue fork...

 

Jon - if you'll indulge me, I'd like to spend a little time on this point. You game?

BUMP - Mr. Eisberg?

 

Well, I'm long past weary of hearing the refrain in the wake of these incidents things like "So, why isn't anyone calling for banning automobiles, knives, pressure cookers, jet skis, baseball bats...", or any other conceivable implement that may have killed someone somewhere along the line...

 

However, if you feel you have some new, unexplored take on the matter, knock yourself out...

 

No new matter - I just take issue w/your contention that the comparison is an "idiotic equivalence". I'd like to see if we can move the conversation above the emotional "your side sucks" long enough to actually address the comparison. Please note - I'm constraining equivalence in this discussion to the misuse of cars, w/r/t willful decisions (reckless driving, DUI, etc) that result in injury/death, not to include random accidents.

 

The comparison is quite apt: In both cases, someone made the decision to misuse an implement, and that decision and subsequent misuse resulted in persons in addition to the decision maker ending up hurt and/or dead. Are those who were killed by the reckless/drunk driver less dead? Are their deaths less tragic? Is the frequency of those occurrences significantly less than the frequency with which innocent people are killed by someone w/a gun?

 

What makes the victims of a mass shooting more tragic, more sensational than a family killed when a DUI crosses the center line? Is it worse because someone used a gun to wreak havoc?

 

I think that the equivalence between violence perpetrated upon innocents and the DUI campaign is apt, and that we ought to model our efforts to curb violence after MADD and other organizations that achieved success in stigmatizing the undesired behavior of DUI. After all, It's the behavior that we want to change, isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I see that they are now saying no AR-15. I guess I missed that since every station on radio and TV were touting NEW information on the shooting to the point that it became background noise.

 

If he didn't acquire an AR-15, then the pistol would be more than adequate to kill 12 unarmed people.

 

There was NO AR-15!

 

And he didn't try to acquire an AR-15. Didn't happen, despite the hyperventilating media. The NICS check and current laws would have stopped this monster from legally obtaining his shotgun -- if the system would only have identified him as a dangerous mental patient. It didn't - and it systematically disarmed the law-abiding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been a bit busy lately, but found time this morning to check in on how the core lawful purpose of the second amendment is being fulfilled since my last update on Sept 12.

 

Armed robber attacks gun nutter, gets three new holes but survives

 

3 armed robbers attack gun nutter as he leaves his business, one shot and killed and the other two decide to leave

 

Two armed robbers force entry into an apartment, gun nutter shoots one and the other decides to leave

 

Gun nutter shoots intruder in his home

 

22 yr old man breaks into 77 year old gun nutter's home at 2 am, gets shot

 

Two armed men attack woman as she arrives home, gun nutter neighbor appears and they decide to leave. That guy gets no sarcasm font since he decided to try to shoot out the tires on the getaway car.

 

Carjacking victim shoots at departing crooks, killing one and wounding the other. It happened after dark in Texas, so I'm pretty sure that's legal. The guy would be in a lot of trouble in Florida and most other states.

 

Intruder breaks into home of sleeping gun nutter and family, gets shot and killed

 

Homeowner has to shoot naked, crazy guy

 

The guy in the first story needs to buy a bigger gun. If he had shot the intruder 6 times and killed him I'm willing to bet that someone would be accusing him of excessive force and even murder. The headline would read something like this "Expert questions need for six shots. Suggests home owner continued shooting after the threat had been neutralized; raising the prospect the home owner could be charged with a crime including 2nd degree murder."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


September 23, 2013, 10:30 am
192 Comments


Weekend Gun Report: September 20-22, 2013

lapierre-blog480.jpgWilliam B. Plowman/NBC, via Reuters

What will Wayne LaPierre will say after each mass shooting, and how long will he wait to say it? It’s a question that’s turned into something of a media parlor game. On Sunday, LaPierre, the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, went on “Meet the Press” and blamed last Monday’s shooting at the Washington Navy Yard not on the ease with which someone so obviously mentally ill could legally purchase guns, but on a lack of security at the shooting site.


“How could anybody look at what happened this week and say there was enough security there?” he said. “In a post-9/11 world, a naval base within miles from Congress and the White House” was left “completely unprotected.”


So, of course, we need more good guys with guns.


“All these brave men and women that are trained in firearms, that signed up to serve in the military, they’re largely disarmed on our military bases,” he said. “When the good guys with guns got there, it stopped.”


He’s nothing if not consistent. Here is today’s report.


Jennifer Mascia


Friday:


A 3-year-old boy is in critical condition after he accidentally shot himself in the chest with a handgun in Horseshoe Bay, Tex., Thursday. A 5-year-old was shot in the back and wounded on the northeast side of Indianapolis, Ind., Friday night. An 8-year-old boy was shot and wounded by his 11-year-old brother when a gun the two were playing with accidentally discharged inGary, Ind., Thursday afternoon. A young girl was shot and killed on aPensacola, Fla., street Thursday night.


24-year-old Monique Smith was shot five times after a football game inMemphis, Tenn., Thursday night, and her ex-boyfriend, 29-year-old Vernon Walton, was arrested at the scene. A 16-year-old boy was shot and wounded while leaving his apartment building in the Gravesend section ofBrooklyn, N.Y., early Thursday. Jason Scott McClay was found shot and killed in aisle 14 of the Rite Aid he managed in Chester, Pa., just before closing Thursday night.


Johnny Tinsey, 36; Rubin Austin, 25; and an unidentified 29-year-old woman were killed and 10 others were wounded in shootings across Chicago, Ill., late Thursday and early Friday. 24-year-old Jimmy Chandler was shot and killed in the Potrero Hill neighborhood of San Francisco, Calif., Thursday evening. A man was shot several times in Bakersfield, Calif., late Thursday. Zhonton Zhavet Berry, 27, was found dead of a gunshot wound in an apartment in east Charlotte, N.C., late Thursday.


Four people were wounded in three separate shootings in Newark, N.J., Thursday night. A 26-year-old man was shot in the leg in Jacksonville, Fla., Thursday night. 58-year-old Keith Stengel was shot and killed during a robbery in Fort Myers, Fla., Thursday evening. 35-year-old Barbara Mason was shot in the arm during an attempted rape in south Fort Myersearly Friday. A 38-year-old man was killed and a 27-year-old man was seriously wounded in a shooting following an argument over two women at a home in Gifford, Fla., Friday afternoon.


Rod Bradway, a police officer in Indianapolis, Ind., was shot and killed while responding to a domestic disturbance on the city’s northwest side early Friday. Miguel Angel Contreras, 26, was shot and killed on the porch of his family’s home in southeast Austin, Tex., early Friday. A man was shot in the back after a verbal altercation in Watsonville, Calif., Friday afternoon. 26-year-old Sophon Kao and 24-year-old Jerry Chim were shot and killed and two women were wounded while celebrating a birthday in Long Beach, Calif., Friday night.


A 24-year-old man was killed and two people were injured, one critically, when someone opened fire on a party with a shotgun in Bozeman, Mont., early Friday. One person arrived at a northeast Portland, Ore., hospital with a gunshot wound Friday night. One person was shot several times and critically wounded in the parking lot of a community center in the Park Hill neighborhood of Denver, Colo., Friday evening.


Three people were shot and killed in an apparent robbery at a pawn shop inDanville, Ky., Friday morning, including the store’s owners, Michael Hockensmith, 34, and his wife Angela Hockensmith, 38, and a customer, Daniel P. Smith, 60. Two men were injured in a shooting at a shopping center in Louisville, Ky., Friday evening. A woman and a man were shot and wounded during a gun battle in Middletown, Ohio, Friday afternoon.


Three people were wounded in a shooting in Elfrida, Ariz., early Friday. One person was critically wounded in a drive-by shooting in Miami, Fla., Friday afternoon. A man was shot and wounded in York, Pa., Friday night. Jazz Beady, 26, who shot in the head in York on Sept. 13, died Friday, a week after he sustained his injuries. A man was shot in Salem, Va., Friday night. Logan Treguier, 20, was killed in a shooting in Colorado Springs, Colo., late Friday.


Three people were wounded in a shooting in Mesa, Ariz., Friday evening. Rick Hammad, 42, was shot and killed in Grand Rapids, Mich., late Friday. A state trooper was shot and wounded by a bank robber as he made his getaway in Dutzow, Mo., Friday morning. A man was found lying in a Taco Bell parking lot in Jackson, Tenn., with gunshot wounds to both legs Friday night. 50-year-old Joseph Gales was shot and killed in Bonita Springs, Fla., Friday morning.


A restaurant manager was shot after three masked gunmen forced their way into S & S Cafeteria in Macon, Ga., Friday night. 59-year-old Susan Brown was shot and killed in Arlington, Tex., Friday evening, and her husband, 51-year-old Ricky Lynn Brown, was arrested.


Saturday:


A 7-year-old was shot in the leg when someone fired on a house in the Pleasant Grove area of Dallas, Tex., Saturday night. Four people were shotand wounded at a nightclub in Palm Springs, Fla., early Saturday. Kristofer Nuland Stafford, 23, was shot and killed in a road rage incident inLas Vegas, Nev., early Saturday. Two men were wounded in a shooting inAtlantic City, N.J., early Saturday. A man was shot and killed near a park where children were playing in Miami Gardens, Fla., Saturday evening.


Timothy Bouder, 53, was shot in the head and neck and wounded after a quarrel over a woman in northwest Carlisle, Pa., Saturday afternoon. A woman and a man were killed in a shooting at an apartment complex in Eden Prairie, Minn., Saturday morning. Adriana Bonet, 25, was killed and 24-year-old Jonathan Rosario and 19-year-old Jaton Pearson were wounded when someone opened fire near a pizza place in Springfield, Mass., early Saturday.


A man was shot in a separate incident in Springfield Saturday night. Charles Johnson, 22, was shot and killed after an argument over a necklace at an apartment complex in Tulsa, Okla., Saturday afternoon. A double shootingin Daly City, Calif., Saturday night sent two people to the hospital, one of whom is in critical condition. Adrian Anderson, 23, was shot and killed while sitting on the front porch of a home in Long Branch, N.J., Saturday morning.


A woman was killed and her brother was wounded in a drive-by shooting inInglewood, Calif., Saturday afternoon. A shooting left a man in critical condition in Fort Wayne, Ind., Saturday night. 20-year-old Donald Bernard Lewis was shot and killed on the campus of Savannah State University in Savannah, Ga., early Saturday. Darryl Jackson, 30, was shot in the foot and Cleon Norwood, 47, was shot in the stomach when someone opened fire at a bar in Central Islip, Long Island, N.Y., Saturday morning.


Willie Casey Jr., 47, was shot and killed in an apartment in Augusta, Ga., early Saturday. A man died in a shooting at a Dallas, Tex., nightclub early Saturday. A man was shot multiple times on the east side of San Antonio, Tex., Saturday afternoon. Three men were wounded in a shooting in the 5th Ward of Paterson, N.J., early Saturday, just three blocks from the scene of the fatal shooting of a 33-year-old man 24 hours earlier.


A 43-year-old man was shot and wounded in Port Arthur, Tex., early Saturday. A man was shot and wounded in Hazelwood, Mo., early Saturday. A 39-year-old Arizona Department of Public Safety officer wasshot multiple times during a traffic stop in Payson, Ariz., Saturday night. Three people were killed in three separate shootings within the span of a few hours in Compton, Calif., Saturday night into Sunday morning.


A 22-year-old man is in critical condition following a shooting in the Crescentville neighborhood of Philadelphia, Pa., Saturday night. A man and a woman were wounded in a drug-related shooting at a motel inRichland County, S.C., Saturday. Jordan Bounsinh, 22, was shot and killed after a fight escalated outside of a Mobil Gas Station in Rockford, Ill., early Saturday. Robert Jackson, 34, was shot and killed in the Woodmere neighborhood of Baltimore, Md., early Saturday.


A 35-year-old man and a 55-year-old woman were shot during an altercation in north Houston, Tex., Saturday night. 64-year-old Joseph A. Buck wasshot and killed in Cooperstown, N.Y., early Saturday, and police arrested his son, 33-year-old Michael Buck. Robert Butler, 17, was found shot to death in Tallahassee, Fla., Saturday night. A “staff shooting death” took place at the federal prison in F