Okay...to settle this, the church shooter could not legally own any gun...

[Lewdog]

what was this all about??

Are you purposefully fucking up quote tags or something in order to troll?

Stop and Frisk doesn't have to do with guilt... it gets abused by many police officers, and not used for its intended purpose. They are called Terry Stops. Look them up. The court case is Terry v. Ohio.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Are you purposefully fucking up quote tags or something in order to troll?

I fixed those quote tags, but I wasn't asking you for that reason, wasn't sure what it was you were getting at

Stop and Frisk doesn't have to do with guilt...

yeah, we've been over this, but perhaps you liked my answer so much you just wanted to hear it again
and the ACLU still opposes it

it gets abused by many police officers, and not used for its intended purpose. They are called Terry Stops. Look them up. The court case is Terry v. Ohio.

so just answer the question asked, is stop and frisk unconstitutional? and now we are in the liberal gray area where the original point is completely gone..go back and read the bulldog post I was replying to and keep my reply in the context of those two posts...or just do the best you can

 

[Lewdog]

Are you purposefully fucking up quote tags or something in order to troll?

I fixed those quote tags, but I wasn't asking you for that reason, wasn't sure what it was you were getting at

Stop and Frisk doesn't have to do with guilt...

yeah, we've been over this, but perhaps you liked my answer so much you just wanted to hear it again
and the ACLU still opposes it

it gets abused by many police officers, and not used for its intended purpose. They are called Terry Stops. Look them up. The court case is Terry v. Ohio.

so just answer the question asked, is stop and frisk unconstitutional? and now we are in the liberal gray area where the original point is completely gone..go back and read the bulldog post I was replying to and keep my reply in the context of those two posts...or just do the best you can

The ACLU doesn't oppose stop and frisk. They oppose the misuse and abuse of stop and frisk. Sorry you don't understand the difference.

Terry Stops, for the purpose provided in Terry v Ohio, is not unConstitutional. It is about police safety. However when an officer abuses the act in order to abuse it by stopping people they think "look" like an immigrant without any type of real probably cause that they committed or will commit a crime, just to ask if they are a citizens and if they have a green card... or to stop minorities just to check for drugs when they did nothing wrong to provide cause to stop them, it is wrong.

Not very complicated to understand.

 

[flacaltenn]

Someone should find out if Insta-Check uses Military Court orders. And if they are up to date. Because they SHOULD BE there..

I guess that would be a good thing to do, but it wouldn't have stopped him from easily buying the gun in Texas. If a check stopped him from buying it from a dealer, he could have easily bought it from an individual with no check.

There aren't enough Fed licensed dealers to handle all private sales. You'd have to provide separate infrastructure, Like an office in every WalMart. I've done private sales because I had 40 Match quality competition rifles to dispose of in my dad's estate. Took awhile. MOST went thru dealers. But there's a lot of camps and civic Junior Rifle Clubs that compete ALL OVER the nation that WANT these cheaper than they'd be thru a dealer commission. .

States CAN require that all private sales go thru FFLs. And it's illegal to do a private sale across state lines. What else ya want?

Universal background checks are what I want, Shutdown of sites like Armslist where guns can be sold online without background checks is what I want. Reasonable gun control is what I want.

If any trades are being interstate on a site like Armslist -- the BATF SHOULD be aware of it. It's not legal. Talk to them.. What do you KNOW about this site? Other than the HuffPo told you it was a bad thing..

I know there are lots of guns claimed to be originally purchased within the last few months, and advertised as like new that are available for purchase without a background check.

Like I said. Not legal in all states. But you cannot transfer as an individual across state lines. What do you NEED to change here?

In terms of this latest fucked up psycho -- the GOVT seems to have failed to include his military judgements. Maybe they are NOT including them at all in Insta-Check. You and I should START THERE -- if we want to learn and fix the system from ACTUAL evidence.

 

[flacaltenn]

Whoever sold him the gun should go to jail

Some were screened purchases. You want to send the GOVT officials that didn't consider his military judgements to jail? I do.. It's incompetent and inept. Materially aided a crazy to commit that crime.

 

[Rustic]

Progressives are stupid on the issue of firearms

 

[airplanemechanic]

Hey moron... when you make the argument that we don't need stricter gun laws because people will just get them illegally...

I can throw the EXACT same reasoning back in your face. WHY HAVE ANY LAW THEN? If people will just break the law, what's the purpose? Why have them?

I totally agree. Anyone not in prison should be allowed to buy a gun. If they are that dangerous, arrest them, try them and find them guilty and lock them up. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Every gun law is just an infringement and violation of the 2nd amendment.

I agree with you. Why have gun laws, especially when the constitution says "shall not be infringed?"

All you do is create a class of citizen unable to defend themselves.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Comrade Death Angel, can it, because you don't know the issue at all.

This was a domestic issue. He thought the mother-in-law was in church.

He shot almost every last person in the church, before he fled.

Good on the barefooted hero with the shot gun, but he did not stop anything other than the killer After The Fact.

It wasn't a shot gun...it was an AR-15 civilian rifle......he stopped the killer from killing more people....likely going after the people he missed in the church...since the police weren't there to stop him....but the civilian with the AR-15 civilian rifle hit him 2 times and ended his killing...

He shot everybody (more than 50 in the church). The civilian stopped nothing at the church. More than 50.

 

[MikeK]

Blacks are arrested and convicted of more crimes... and there is a whole other story to that, and I don't feel like repeating it again.

White juveniles use marijuana more than Black juveniles yet Black juveniles are arrested extremely more often. And when you talk about illegal prescription drug abuse? White juveniles are ahead of minorities by a mile... so when is the last time you heard of a SWAT team breaking down the door of a White suburban family to arrest their kids for drugs?

In this issue I find it necessary to both agree with you and disagree.

While I strongly agree with your complaint about SWAT teams breaking down doors I must tell you that Blacks do not suffer this frightening and humiliating experience more than Whites. As the video I've linked to below reveals there are over 40,000 "no-knock," door-busting raids conducted every year. That's an average of 125 every day, seven days a week. But by no means are Black homes invaded more than are White homes.

In many examples these raids are badly botched, i.e., the wrong residence is breached and in some examples innocent people are killed or badly abused and injured. I read of one example in which a flash/bang grenade was tossed through an open window prior to breaking into a residence. The grenade landed in crib where a one year-old baby was sleeping and it badly damaged the baby's face. The reason for this raid was information by an unreliable informant that a large amount of marijuana would be found -- which turned out to be less than half an ounce.

I can remember that back in the 40's and 50s police were very reluctant to violate the Castle Doctrine, which is the constitutionally sanctified principle that one's home, whether it be a mansion or a furnished room in a run-down boarding house, is his/her castle and forcible entry therein was forbidden without the most serious justification. Judges would issue a "no-knock" break-in warrant only under the most serious life-and-death circumstances. Back then the number of break-in warrants issued was typically less than ten for the entire United States. Today the average is 40,000. About 125 a day, every day.

Another Day, Another 124 Violent SWAT Raids

It should be noted that breaking into a Colonial's home by British Regulars, who were the cops of the Colonial era, was a leading provocation for the American Revolution.

 

[Lewdog]

Blacks are arrested and convicted of more crimes... and there is a whole other story to that, and I don't feel like repeating it again.

White juveniles use marijuana more than Black juveniles yet Black juveniles are arrested extremely more often. And when you talk about illegal prescription drug abuse? White juveniles are ahead of minorities by a mile... so when is the last time you heard of a SWAT team breaking down the door of a White suburban family to arrest their kids for drugs?

In this issue I find it necessary to both agree with you and disagree.

While I strongly agree with your complaint about SWAT teams breaking down doors I must tell you that Blacks do not suffer this frightening and humiliating experience more than Whites. As the video I've linked to below reveals there are over 40,000 "no-knock," door-busting raids conducted every year. That's an average of 125 every day, seven days a week. But by no means are Black homes invaded more than are White homes.

In many examples these raids are badly botched, i.e., the wrong residence is breached and in some examples innocent people are killed or badly abused and injured. I read of one example in which a flash/bang grenade was tossed through an open window prior to breaking into a residence. The grenade landed in crib where a one year-old baby was sleeping and it badly damaged the baby's face. The reason for this raid was information by an unreliable informant that a large amount of marijuana would be found -- which turned out to be less than half an ounce.

I can remember that back in the 40's and 50s police were very reluctant to violate the Castle Doctrine, which is the constitutionally sanctified principle that one's home, whether it be a mansion or a furnished room in a run-down boarding house, is his/her castle and forcible entry therein was forbidden without the most serious justification. Judges would issue a "no-knock" break-in warrant only under the most serious life-and-death circumstances. Back then the number of break-in warrants issued was typically less than ten for the entire United States. Today the average is 40,000. About 125 a day, every day.

Another Day, Another 124 Violent SWAT Raids

It should be noted that breaking into a Colonial's home by British Regulars, who were the cops of the Colonial era, was a leading provocation for the American Revolution.

Well in one of my courses this semester, we just had to write a short essay based on the readings provided. Part of it had to do with how Blacks were targets more than other groups, including with SWAT teams. Here is my paper, including the references which we are required to cite in the paper. Now, remember this is my paper.



Starting in the 1960’s under President Richard Nixon, and reemerging in the 1980’s under President Ronald Reagan, the “War on Drugs” created as a by-product, serious acts of violence. This violence was not only perpetrated by drug dealers, traffickers, and gangs, but also came in the form of counter-violence from law enforcement (Kienscherf, 2012). This paper will discuss how police violence has become normalized through policies, procedures, and the media; why public places have begun to be para-militarized; and attempt to explain that these changes were not just related to the war on drugs.

In the 1980’s the war on drugs began to ramp up, and by the 1990’s gang violence started to sky rocket (Parenti, 2008). This was especially true in the urban areas of the United States. This forced the government to take a stiffer approach, that included SWAT-style raids using military type tactics and equipment. SWAT was a term coined by Daryl Gates in the 1960’s, who at the time was a Los Angeles Police Department commander. It stood for, “Special Weapons and Tactics,” though originally Gates wanted to call it “Special Weapons Attack Team.” His superiors felt that the latter was a bit too candid and provocative (Parenti, 2008). These SWAT teams would promote violence by law enforcement, and spread from being concentrated in the large cities, outwards into the more rural areas. They would also start to be used more often, rather than just a handful of times per year. Their purpose became over-used. This would create a new group of people whom Dr. Peter Kraska would label, “culturally intoxicated young officers” (Parenti, 2008). Another way that police violence became normalized is through the media. Stories about criminals doing horrific acts, like that of Rudy Eugene, gave the police an excuse to be more violent, and the public accepted it. In 2012, a naked and unarmed Eugene, was shot and killed after being caught “eating the face” of a homeless man (Linnemann, Wall, & Green, 2014). Sadly, this type of story would start to become more common place throughout the years.

The war on drugs started out as a metaphor, being compared to an actual war. An example of this was when a local mayor described gang members as “the Viet Cong abroad in our society” (Kienscherf, 2012). Eventually however, it began to take on characteristics closer to the real deal. Drug gangs and cartels started to become more organized and better armed, to the point that normal law enforcement equipment and training were no longer effective nor safe. The government was forced to deploy para-military equipment and tactics to border places and the hyperghettos (Kienscherf, 2012). The government of the United States has been able to rationalize this para-militarization of public spaces by using the crippling of the Mexican government by drug organizations as a warning (Kienscherf, 2012). It is through this intimidation, that citizens are convinced they should give the government more power, accept the outcome, and embrace the safety it provides.

The war on drugs is not the only reason for the application of para-militarization. Economics plays a role in public places becoming para-militarized, as communities work towards taking back the poorer areas that are full of crime, to revitalize them with new, higher-end businesses and attractions. The communities believe that if they can create these places, it will kick start financial growth and create job opportunities that will lower crime. Sadly, it does not work (Parenti, 2008). Often, they would accomplish this by using coordinated SWAT raids targeted towards the Black communities (Parenti, 2008). They would conduct these raids for offenders like drug dealers and squatters.

Para-militarization of police in the United States has been viewed as critical to combating an enemy that has become increasingly more violent and better prepared than ever before. This is totally understandable in many circumstances, like when dealing with drug cartels and gangs who are often well-funded and well-equipped. The problem lies in how far the government uses these police forces against groups that are vulnerable, such as minorities and the poor, who do not pose the same type of threat as gangs and cartels. This animosity leads to higher tensions between the groups, and lowers the legitimacy of law enforcement within that community. When this happens, you end up with an escalation of crime, rather than a reduction, wasting funds, and creating future dangerous situations. It is just another example of a good idea being incorrectly implemented, and abused.








References



Kienscherf, M. (2012). Security Assemblages and Spaces of Exception: The Production of (Para-) Militarized Spaces in the U.S. War on Drugs. Radical Criminology, 1, 19-35.


Linnemann, T., Wall, T., & Green, E. (2014). The Walking Dead and Killing State:. Theoretical Criminology, 18, 332-352.


Parenti, C. (2008). Lockdown America: police and prisons in the age of crisis. London: Verso.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

a back ground check is not breaking the 2nd amendment is it?

The constitution says regulated, regulated by whom? The state governments?

our government does have the power to regulate guns

and we have the right to own a gun for protection

We do need better background checks, was his mental heath history even known, if so he could not purchase as far I know.

Exactly what mental health history are you talking about?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

can any gun nut on here give an example of any instance where a good guy with an automatic or semi automatic weapon stopped a crime from happening only because they had this type of gun to stop it?

Any example at all since 2004, that these semi automatics were used by a good gun owner to stop a crime or mass murder from occurring? surely, it would have been reported on???

The church neighbor shot Kelley with an AR-15.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

He illegally owned a gun... and posted it on his Facebook to the world and people didn't notify law enforcement. All those people are complicity in the murders he committed for not doing something. We can't expect law enforcement to be EVERYWHERE and do EVERYTHING...

Exactly you moron...that is why we need concealed and open carry laws so the people being shot at by these killers can stop them before the 5 minutes it takes the police to get there.....

As you said.....the cops can't be everywhere and do everything......

What you posted had nothing to do with what I said, you just took it as a chance to respond in order to make a personal attack.

How about you address what I said? He illegally had a gun, flaunted it on Facebook, and no one said anything. People died.

How would anyone on Facebook know he was not eligible to own a gun?

How?!!? If they are his friends on Facebook you don't think some of them were also his friends in real life? You don't think his community knew why he was discharged from the military? For beating his wife??? ALMOST everyone in this country, and especially gun owners know that you can't legally own a gun if you are convicted of domestic violence, and this guy flaunted his gun out there for everyone to see. So don't fly that bullshit flag with me.

You assume he moved back to his hometown.

Dishonorable discharges aren't posted in the newspapers.

Do you know every person in your town who has had a restraining order put on them?

Do you know every person with a domestic abuse charge?



How would anyone on Facebook know these things if he didn't tell them?

And I don't have a Facebook account but I do know it is pretty easy to have "friends" you have never met.

He posted a picture of him with a gun. Do you know when that picture was actually taken? Do you know if he bought the gun before his domestic violence charges?

If you don't know all these things you cannot expect anyone else to know them

I have tried finding anyone who has posted it so far in this thread, The shooter's weapons were all bought legally. He had a Bad Conduct Discharge and not a Dishonorable Discharge. The former does not take away his gun rights but the latter would have.

 

[Lewdog]

Exactly you moron...that is why we need concealed and open carry laws so the people being shot at by these killers can stop them before the 5 minutes it takes the police to get there.....

As you said.....the cops can't be everywhere and do everything......

What you posted had nothing to do with what I said, you just took it as a chance to respond in order to make a personal attack.

How about you address what I said? He illegally had a gun, flaunted it on Facebook, and no one said anything. People died.

How would anyone on Facebook know he was not eligible to own a gun?

How?!!? If they are his friends on Facebook you don't think some of them were also his friends in real life? You don't think his community knew why he was discharged from the military? For beating his wife??? ALMOST everyone in this country, and especially gun owners know that you can't legally own a gun if you are convicted of domestic violence, and this guy flaunted his gun out there for everyone to see. So don't fly that bullshit flag with me.

You assume he moved back to his hometown.

Dishonorable discharges aren't posted in the newspapers.

Do you know every person in your town who has had a restraining order put on them?

Do you know every person with a domestic abuse charge?



How would anyone on Facebook know these things if he didn't tell them?

And I don't have a Facebook account but I do know it is pretty easy to have "friends" you have never met.

He posted a picture of him with a gun. Do you know when that picture was actually taken? Do you know if he bought the gun before his domestic violence charges?

If you don't know all these things you cannot expect anyone else to know them

I have tried finding anyone who has posted it so far in this thread, The shooter's weapons were all bought legally. He had a Bad Conduct Discharge and not a Dishonorable Discharge. The former does not take away his gun rights but the latter would have.

I posted it. He had a domestic violence charge in the military and the Air Force fucked up and didn't put it in the system, so it didn't flag him in the system when he had his background check.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Anybody who knew about his weapons and that he should not have had them has murder blood guilt on them.

Until the second he killed the first person, the NRA still considered him to be a good guy with a gun.

He as a convicted felon troll. You must enjoy making yourself out to be an idiot.

Actually, he wasn't. He had a Bad Conduct Discharge, and not a Dishonorable discharge.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

So...which gun law stopped this guy from getting his gun?

None, that's why the whole system needs an overhaul.

Wrong...we already could have arrested this guy...he couldn't legally own those guns....the NICS system could be fixed....but you guys don't care about that...

Yes, he could and did. the reports of him having a Dishonorable Discharge were incorrect. He had a Bad Conduct Discharge. He bought his weapons legally because he wasn't in the NICS system.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

He illegally owned a gun... and posted it on his Facebook to the world and people didn't notify law enforcement. All those people are complicity in the murders he committed for not doing something. We can't expect law enforcement to be EVERYWHERE and do EVERYTHING...

Ha, the Texas background check?
Is that a check to make sure that you have purchased alcohol too?

He passed 2 Texas background checks when he bought his guns.

Nope. You are wrong again!

Doesn't that get tiresome?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I nailed it!
27 Murdered in Texas Church

The TERRORIST preached ATHEISM. THAT is the motive.

LIAR!

Texas Shooting: Devin Kelley sent threatening texts before Sutherland Springs church attack, police say
The massacre appeared to stem from a domestic situation and was not racially or religiously motivated, Texas Department of Public Safety Regional Director Freeman Martin said.

So as an atheist, he killed all of those Christians because his mother-in-law didn't go to church yesterday?

 

[flacaltenn]

Exactly you moron...that is why we need concealed and open carry laws so the people being shot at by these killers can stop them before the 5 minutes it takes the police to get there.....

As you said.....the cops can't be everywhere and do everything......

What you posted had nothing to do with what I said, you just took it as a chance to respond in order to make a personal attack.

How about you address what I said? He illegally had a gun, flaunted it on Facebook, and no one said anything. People died.

How would anyone on Facebook know he was not eligible to own a gun?

How?!!? If they are his friends on Facebook you don't think some of them were also his friends in real life? You don't think his community knew why he was discharged from the military? For beating his wife??? ALMOST everyone in this country, and especially gun owners know that you can't legally own a gun if you are convicted of domestic violence, and this guy flaunted his gun out there for everyone to see. So don't fly that bullshit flag with me.

You assume he moved back to his hometown.

Dishonorable discharges aren't posted in the newspapers.

Do you know every person in your town who has had a restraining order put on them?

Do you know every person with a domestic abuse charge?



How would anyone on Facebook know these things if he didn't tell them?

And I don't have a Facebook account but I do know it is pretty easy to have "friends" you have never met.

He posted a picture of him with a gun. Do you know when that picture was actually taken? Do you know if he bought the gun before his domestic violence charges?

If you don't know all these things you cannot expect anyone else to know them

I have tried finding anyone who has posted it so far in this thread, The shooter's weapons were all bought legally. He had a Bad Conduct Discharge and not a Dishonorable Discharge. The former does not take away his gun rights but the latter would have.

Air Force just admitted late today that the Court Orders from his Court Martial never made it to the Insta-Check system. They admitted it's fucked up. Don't know how many other papers were not filed with Insta-Check. I have a thread in Breaking News with the link..

And here we are -- listening to the left tell us how much more complicated and delicate they want to make that system. The Govt can't manage it or make it work NOW... But Fed-Ex could. Or MicroSoft or any number of competent MOTIVATED private companies that would get their asses SUED to Holy Hell if they fucked up like this..

 

[Peach]

So...which gun law stopped this guy from getting his gun?

None, that's why the whole system needs an overhaul.

Wrong...we already could have arrested this guy...he couldn't legally own those guns....the NICS system could be fixed....but you guys don't care about that...

Yes, he could and did. the reports of him having a Dishonorable Discharge were incorrect. He had a Bad Conduct Discharge. He bought his weapons legally because he wasn't in the NICS system.

I asked about the Bad Conduct conviction; it can remove Firearm Rights but it must be deliniated. As to why he turned and began his evil plan, he appealed the judgement, and lost. Then the divorce, and...