Shooter in Houston

[2aguy]

Do you really want to live in a country where every suspicious move you make is acted upon?

If I were waving around an AR at a bunch of workmen,....

You'll have to be more specific than this to form any rational conclusion.
Feel free to provide citations.

Really? I find nothing rational about the situation.

"The thought came to my mind, 'I really hope it's not Nathan, part of the situation,'" said John Elmore with RISE Association Management Group, the property manager for The Oaks at West University, where Desai lived.

Elmore told Eyewitness News for the last two months, Desai's behavior had been erratic. He seemed paranoid and thought someone was "out to get him", Elmore said.

The problems started August 4th, when Desai confronted roofers with a gun. He told police he thought someone was breaking into his condo, but Elmore says it was a long-term project and residents were properly notified.

EMBED </>MORE NEWS VIDEOS

The father and former law partner of the suspect in Monday's West U shooting rampage react.

"They [roofers] were scared for their life. They called their boss and said somebody pointed directly at them, yelled something they didn't know what it was, but they felt like they were going to get shot," Elmore said.

Desai was not charged. In a news conference Monday afternoon, Houston police said they have no record of a call concerning Desai or his address.

Then, last week, Desai called to complain about a plumbing issue, but wouldn't let anyone in and then became defensive, according to Elmore, when questioned about it.

And yet no one called the police? Or were they afraid to do so because he was an Indian...and they didn't want to be accused of islamaphobia?

 

[M14 Shooter]

If "a citizen" is legally able to buy and own a gun, then the number of guns he has is none of the state's business; the state has no compelling need to know.

You still haven't answered the question...

This is a lie.
I gave you an a answer; you simply do not want to address it.

If "a citizen" is legally able to buy and own a gun, then the number of guns he has is none of the state's business; the state has no compelling need to know.

I look forward to your next attempt to avoid giving a meaningful response.

 

[2aguy]

If "a citizen" is legally able to buy and own a gun, then the number of guns he has is none of the state's business; the state has no compelling need to know.

I see that I've backed you into a corner. Well, actually you backed yourself into the corner, but I'll accept some of the blame if it helps you to 'save face'.

You still haven't answered the question, and the reason is quite obviously that your pride and fragile ego are 'on the line'. Here it is again. Pay attention this time. I'll paraphrase so as not to tax your concentration for any length of time .....

.... do you really want to live in a country where any citizen can acquire a huge assault arsenal without raising any red flags?

Well? And would be alright if your neighbour were to point an assault rifle at you ....... at your wife ...... at your children?

Yes......if they are not shooting people with those weapons there is no problem. There are people with huge collections of guns and they don't use any of them to commit crimes or murder......the gang banger in Chicago.....all they need is one illegal gun........

Your response is a typical, non rational response to facts and reality.

 

[OldLady]

You'll have to be more specific than this to form any rational conclusion.
Feel free to provide citations.

Really?

yes.
You speak of "waving an AR 15".
Unless you provide the specifics of the incident, your mention of it means nothing.

The problems started August 4th, when Desai confronted roofers with a gun. He told police he thought someone was breaking into his condo...Desai was not charged. In a news conference Monday afternoon, Houston police said they have no record of a call concerning Desai or his address.

There you go.
Your claim of 'waving an AR-15" is much ado about nothing, and certainly not worthy of anyone "taking notice".

"They [roofers] were scared for their life. They called their boss and said somebody pointed directly at them, yelled something they didn't know what it was, but they felt like they were going to get shot," Elmore said.
Sorry I said "waved." He POINTED it at them.
Buddy, if that's nothing in your book, I'm glad you're not a neighbor of mine.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You'll have to be more specific than this to form any rational conclusion.
Feel free to provide citations.

Really?

yes.
You speak of "waving an AR 15".
Unless you provide the specifics of the incident, your mention of it means nothing.

The problems started August 4th, when Desai confronted roofers with a gun. He told police he thought someone was breaking into his condo...Desai was not charged. In a news conference Monday afternoon, Houston police said they have no record of a call concerning Desai or his address.

There you go.
Your claim of 'waving an AR-15" is much ado about nothing, and certainly not worthy of anyone "taking notice".

"They [roofers] were scared for their life

According to your post:
Desai was not charged.
In a news conference Monday afternoon, Houston police said they have no record of a call concerning Desai or his address
Whatever the people claimed he did, it clearly did not amount to anything in the eyes of the law.

And so, you can whine all you want about what he supposedly did or did not do with an AR15, it remains much ado about nothing.

 

[GLASNOST]

This is a lie.
I gave you an a answer; you simply do not want to address it.

If "a citizen" is legally able to buy and own a gun, then the number of guns he has is none of the state's business; the state has no compelling need to know.

I look forward to your next attempt to avoid giving a meaningful response.

I knew you wouldn't answer the question ..... I just wanted to see how far you'd sink into your own brown stuff. Up to your eyeballs I see. We're finished here. I don't want to be responsible for you drowning completely.

 

[M14 Shooter]

This is a lie.
I gave you an a answer; you simply do not want to address it.

If "a citizen" is legally able to buy and own a gun, then the number of guns he has is none of the state's business; the state has no compelling need to know.
I look forward to your next attempt to avoid giving a meaningful response.

I knew you wouldn't answer the question .

It's clear you are willing to lie to yourself, and thus, to me.
As such, you have proven I need not waste any more time on you.

 

[OldLady]

You'll have to be more specific than this to form any rational conclusion.
Feel free to provide citations.

Really?

yes.
You speak of "waving an AR 15".
Unless you provide the specifics of the incident, your mention of it means nothing.

The problems started August 4th, when Desai confronted roofers with a gun. He told police he thought someone was breaking into his condo...Desai was not charged. In a news conference Monday afternoon, Houston police said they have no record of a call concerning Desai or his address.

There you go.
Your claim of 'waving an AR-15" is much ado about nothing, and certainly not worthy of anyone "taking notice".

"They [roofers] were scared for their life

According to your post:
Desai was not charged.
In a news conference Monday afternoon, Houston police said they have no record of a call concerning Desai or his address
Whatever the people claimed he did, it clearly did not amount to anything in the eyes of the law.

And so, you can whine all you want about what he supposedly did or did not do with an AR15, it remains much ado about nothing.

Listen, you creepy fucker, if I were whining, you would know it and you wouldn't like it. Keep your unprovoked insults to yourself.

This perfectly reasonable conversation began about 'red flags' that might have indicated the guy was going off the rails. So that some kind of help might have been gotten for him BEFORE his rampage. It is not about an arrest record, although the fact that he wasn't reported/arrested does not actually mean it was "nothing." It simply means the police were not involved.
Most people would have been quite happy if someone had intervened before he began taking aim at random commuters in his neighborhood. This is about mental health intervention, not taking your precious arsenal away. Go with 2AGuy and start another thread if you need to hyperventilate about that.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You'll have to be more specific than this to form any rational conclusion.
Feel free to provide citations.

Really?

yes.
You speak of "waving an AR 15".
Unless you provide the specifics of the incident, your mention of it means nothing.

The problems started August 4th, when Desai confronted roofers with a gun. He told police he thought someone was breaking into his condo...Desai was not charged. In a news conference Monday afternoon, Houston police said they have no record of a call concerning Desai or his address.

There you go.
Your claim of 'waving an AR-15" is much ado about nothing, and certainly not worthy of anyone "taking notice".

"They [roofers] were scared for their life

According to your post:
Desai was not charged.
In a news conference Monday afternoon, Houston police said they have no record of a call concerning Desai or his address
Whatever the people claimed he did, it clearly did not amount to anything in the eyes of the law.

And so, you can whine all you want about what he supposedly did or did not do with an AR15, it remains much ado about nothing.

Listen, you creepy fucker....

Awww... puddum can't handle the fact her whining has been rightfully ignored...

Your claim that his action, whatever it was, with an AR15 should have been "noticed" fell flat on its face, because of the information YOU provided..



Danger of Harm
You can commit a deadly conduct offense in Texas whenever you engage in any type of conduct that you know, or should know, will place someone else at risk of suffering serious bodily injury. For example, if you point a gun at someone else, you can be charged with deadly conduct even if you never fire the weapon or never intend to fire it. It's enough that you intentionally brandish the weapon and know, or should know, that such an act poses a danger to someone else.

(Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.05.)

if the guy did what you want to believe he did, why was he not arrested?

 

[GLASNOST]

Yes......if they are not shooting people with those weapons there is no problem.

There are 2 reasons why I don't believe this statement. FIRST. Arresting someone for 'shooting people' does not come under the 'red flag' concept. The red flag is when you carry a weapon in a hostel manner or if you take aim, which is in itself is a hostile manoeuvre no matter how calmly or 'non aggressive' your stance might be .... and a criminal offense I do believe. Isn't it? A red flag is something that preemptively foresees what is to come, in this case actually shooting someone. SECOND. The unanswered question (put to your mate who refuses to answer it) deals with one's personal opinion. If someone points a weapon at you, your wife, your children would you still say 'no problem'? I sense that you and what's-his-name are more worried about your right (assuming you have one) to own and/or carry weapons. This sort of attitude is not healthy to the discussion so let me make it clear. You see no problem with someone pointing weapons at fellow citizens .... as long as he doesn't pull the trigger. I have children. Do you? Let's give this shooter the benefit of the doubt - and carry your own theory straight down the line. He's on the roof. This we know from more than one source. He's got an assault weapon in his hands. Also correct? Now, he's up there on the roof with this assault weapon in his hands ... and he's pointing at some builders. This also seems to be a fact. There he is either beading down at them ... or randomly waving the weapon in the general direction of the workers. Let me stop right here and make a confession .... I don't want my children to see this drama unfold, whether the guy pulls the trigger or not. He's already gone too far, and the trauma my own children will have already experienced is beyond 'no problem'. What about you?

Your response is a typical, non rational response to facts and reality.

Would you consider retracting that statement?

 

[OldLady]

Really?

yes.
You speak of "waving an AR 15".
Unless you provide the specifics of the incident, your mention of it means nothing.

The problems started August 4th, when Desai confronted roofers with a gun. He told police he thought someone was breaking into his condo...Desai was not charged. In a news conference Monday afternoon, Houston police said they have no record of a call concerning Desai or his address.

There you go.
Your claim of 'waving an AR-15" is much ado about nothing, and certainly not worthy of anyone "taking notice".

"They [roofers] were scared for their life

According to your post:
Desai was not charged.
In a news conference Monday afternoon, Houston police said they have no record of a call concerning Desai or his address
Whatever the people claimed he did, it clearly did not amount to anything in the eyes of the law.

And so, you can whine all you want about what he supposedly did or did not do with an AR15, it remains much ado about nothing.

Listen, you creepy fucker....

Awww... puddum can't handle the fact her whining has been rightfully ignored...

Your claim that his action, whatever it was, with an AR15 should have been "noticed" fell flat on its face, because of the information YOU provided..



Danger of Harm
You can commit a deadly conduct offense in Texas whenever you engage in any type of conduct that you know, or should know, will place someone else at risk of suffering serious bodily injury. For example, if you point a gun at someone else, you can be charged with deadly conduct even if you never fire the weapon or never intend to fire it. It's enough that you intentionally brandish the weapon and know, or should know, that such an act poses a danger to someone else.

(Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.05.)

if the guy did what you want to believe he did, why was he not arrested?

You didn't even read my post, did you?
What the cops knew or didn't know is not what most of us were discussing; we were talking about possible indicators of a mass shooter waiting to erupt. I refer you to my previous post.

 

[GLASNOST]

Listen, you creepy fucker, if I were whining, you would know it and you wouldn't like it. Keep your unprovoked insults to yourself.

This perfectly reasonable conversation began about 'red flags' that might have indicated the guy was going off the rails. So that some kind of help might have been gotten for him BEFORE his rampage. It is not about an arrest record, although the fact that he wasn't reported/arrested does not actually mean it was "nothing." It simply means the police were not involved.
Most people would have been quite happy if someone had intervened before he began taking aim at random commuters in his neighborhood. This is about mental health intervention, not taking your precious arsenal away. Go with 2AGuy and start another thread if you need to hyperventilate about that.

Chill beautiful. He's a creepy fucker 'by design' and he just wants to see if he can upset someone. He knows very well what you (and I) have been telling him, but he's got a weak character. He probably hangs out at the local high school, timing himself to be sure to arrive during recess so that he can impress the kids with all the latest info he's gleaned from drunks at the bowling alley 'Snack & Tap'. . Ignore him or simply put him on 'ignore status'. Simples! Now give me a high five.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You didn't even read my post, did you?
What the cops knew or didn't know is not what most of us were discussing; we were talking about possible indicators of a mass shooter waiting to erupt.

Yes... the supposed "waving of an AR-15" at some workers, which, according to the information you posted, was apparently nothing as the man was not arrested by the police for breaking the law.

That being the case, what other "indicators" do you have?

 

[2aguy]

Yes......if they are not shooting people with those weapons there is no problem.

There are 2 reasons why I don't believe this statement. FIRST. Arresting someone for 'shooting people' does not come under the 'red flag' concept. The red flag is when you carry a weapon in a hostel manner or if you take aim, which is in itself is a hostile manoeuvre no matter how calmly or 'non aggressive' your stance might be .... and a criminal offense I do believe. Isn't it? A red flag is something that preemptively foresees what is to come, in this case actually shooting someone. SECOND. The unanswered question (put to your mate who refuses to answer it) deals with one's personal opinion. If someone points a weapon at you, your wife, your children would you still say 'no problem'? I sense that you and what's-his-name are more worried about your right (assuming you have one) to own and/or carry weapons. This sort of attitude is not healthy to the discussion so let me make it clear. You see no problem with someone pointing weapons at fellow citizens .... as long as he doesn't pull the trigger. I have children. Do you? Let's give this shooter the benefit of the doubt - and carry your own theory straight down the line. He's on the roof. This we know from more than one source. He's got an assault weapon in his hands. Also correct? Now, he's up there on the roof with this assault weapon in his hands ... and he's pointing at some builders. This also seems to be a fact. There he is either beading down at them ... or randomly waving the weapon in the general direction of the workers. Let me stop right here and make a confession .... I don't want my children to see this drama unfold, whether the guy pulls the trigger or not. He's already gone too far, and the trauma my own children will have already experienced is beyond 'no problem'. What about you?

Your response is a typical, non rational response to facts and reality.

Would you consider retracting that statement?

You addressed the wrong answer.....my answer was to wether it was a problem for people to keep large collections of guns.....my answer is that it is okay for anyone to keep as many guns as they want as long as they don't use them for crimes.....

Waving a gun around is called Brandishing...and is already a crime......if he pointed the gun at those guys, and they called the cops, they could easily have arrested him....

 

[GLASNOST]

Waving a gun around is called Brandishing...and is already a crime......if he pointed the gun at those guys, and they called the cops, they could easily have arrested him....

That's what I thought.

 

[OldLady]

Yes......if they are not shooting people with those weapons there is no problem.

There are 2 reasons why I don't believe this statement. FIRST. Arresting someone for 'shooting people' does not come under the 'red flag' concept. The red flag is when you carry a weapon in a hostel manner or if you take aim, which is in itself is a hostile manoeuvre no matter how calmly or 'non aggressive' your stance might be .... and a criminal offense I do believe. Isn't it? A red flag is something that preemptively foresees what is to come, in this case actually shooting someone. SECOND. The unanswered question (put to your mate who refuses to answer it) deals with one's personal opinion. If someone points a weapon at you, your wife, your children would you still say 'no problem'? I sense that you and what's-his-name are more worried about your right (assuming you have one) to own and/or carry weapons. This sort of attitude is not healthy to the discussion so let me make it clear. You see no problem with someone pointing weapons at fellow citizens .... as long as he doesn't pull the trigger. I have children. Do you? Let's give this shooter the benefit of the doubt - and carry your own theory straight down the line. He's on the roof. This we know from more than one source. He's got an assault weapon in his hands. Also correct? Now, he's up there on the roof with this assault weapon in his hands ... and he's pointing at some builders. This also seems to be a fact. There he is either beading down at them ... or randomly waving the weapon in the general direction of the workers. Let me stop right here and make a confession .... I don't want my children to see this drama unfold, whether the guy pulls the trigger or not. He's already gone too far, and the trauma my own children will have already experienced is beyond 'no problem'. What about you?

Your response is a typical, non rational response to facts and reality.

Would you consider retracting that statement?

You addressed the wrong answer.....my answer was to wether it was a problem for people to keep large collections of guns.....my answer is that it is okay for anyone to keep as many guns as they want as long as they don't use them for crimes.....

Waving a gun around is called Brandishing...and is already a crime......if he pointed the gun at those guys, and they called the cops, they could easily have arrested him....

Do over 2,000 rounds of ammunition when there are only two weapons mean anything? Like maybe someone planned to do a LOT of shooting?
I don't think we have any business selling body armor to civilians. We aren't at war. What do people need it for, anyway?

 

[GLASNOST]

Do over 2,000 rounds of ammunition when there are only two weapons mean anything? Like maybe someone planned to do a LOT of shooting?
I don't think we have any business selling body armor to civilians. We aren't at war.
What do people need it for, anyway?

Ah! Well .......... you being a woman, you wouldn't know - poor girl. I however, am a man and I know a thing or two about penis enlargements, penis extensions and facsimile thereof. You see, it doesn't matter how much they are packing, my fellow man never thinks it's 'enough'.

 

[M14 Shooter]

[
Do over 2,000 rounds of ammunition when there are only two weapons mean anything?

Is it legal to have 2000 rounds of ammunition? Yes?
Then no.

I don't think we have any business selling body armor to civilians.

So?