world

Family strife, threats preceded Texas church massacre by former U.S. airman

55 Comments
By Jon Herskovitz and Lisa Maria Garcia

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2018 GPlusMedia Inc.

55 Comments
Login to comment

The Supreme Court has also upheld laws banning assault weapons. Anyone participating in a thread like this should know that.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The 2nd amendment was written over 200 years ago, long before these types of weapons.

Also, the NRA is the gun lobby's lap dog, people should realize that.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Laguna - Someday, the Supreme Court will correctly interpret this amendment- or Congress will force it to do so, and free people from that future will look back in horror at the barbarism we today inflict upon ourselves.

It's not a Second Amendment problem; it's an interpretation problem.

"Correctly interpret"? Are you suggesting that the SCOTUS has already interpreted that the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Bill of (Individual) Rights is one of the many individual rights listed in the U.S. Bill of (Individual) Rights?

You seem to be hoping that the court, or Congress, will re-interpret the 2nd Amendment into something you might finally agree with.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Michael Jackson - Kelley used a Ruder AR-556

Somebody at JT is not doing their job. It was probably a Ruger AR-15, 5.56 mm.

The monster used a Ruger AR-556.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SuperLib - That's a huge obstacle in the gun debate.

The biggest obstacle to the gun-banners attempts to undermine the U.S. Bill of (Individual) Rights would be (a) the fact that the gun-banners do not have the votes to keep gun-banning legislators in office, and (b) the gun-banners do not have a majority in Congress. Perhaps if more foreign nationals, or illegal aliens within the U.S., were to vote more often in U.S. elections, the gun-banners could force U.S. citizens to give up their belief in their right to self-defense.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Laguna - Better keep it on your lap if you're a church-goin' man. Then again, "church-goin'" and "man" - nah, they don't describe your type.

Your post is nothing short of a rude, and personal, attack. It is both unwarranted, and unwelcome.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

He. was court martialed for abusing his wife and lug step son and in military jail. He was dishonorably discharged, Air Force official explained. Somehow he was not reported to. FBI national database. So he could buy a gun every year.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There clearly is a double standard at work here.

Yeah, well the government can't deport Americans unfortunately. It can take action against people who commit crimes that should never have been here to begin with.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

There clearly is a double standard at work here. If the shooter was a white male, Trump says nothing. Once the shooter has any relation to Islam, then he starts tweeting and raving like mad that we should ban all Muslims. This is troubling because it sets a bad example to all his impressionable sheep. Discrimination and hate crimes against Muslims, or anyone who looks like a Muslims have been on the rise. Trump continues to fan the flames of hate

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Criminals, especially deranged ones with suicidal intent, do not obey gun laws.

Except those with suicidal intent are generally not looking to 'get away' with a crime. If you look at the data the vast majority of guns used in mass shootings are legally obtained (although the perp may not have had a license to carry). Reverse that statistic and close to 80 percent of weapons in regular homicides are not legally owned by the suspect.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@Bass

You didn't address the question about the kind of weapon used in Las Vegas. You see firearms as necessary for self-defence and hunting. You seem to see heavy duty weapons as something to collect or blast away with in the desert for some reason, therefore, not necessary.

These weapons have been used to commit slaughter on a mass scale. Is this a necessary price to pay for these very powerful devices to be on sale and fall into the hands of lunatics? How would that sound to people maimed or the families of those killed? Sorry, these military-grade weapons are on sale because people like them and it's not illegal?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Background checks are optional. Had he been denied at a gun store he could have just bought at a gun show, bought from a private party, or got a roommate with a gun. You guys made so many holes in the law that it's mostly meaningless (but we NEED TO ENFORCE THE CURRENT LAWS! lol).

I always carry my .380. It's like my American Express card: I never leave home without it. . . .

Of course you do. Some guys need guns or else they'd wet their pants just walking down the street.

That's a huge obstacle in the gun debate. Getting rid of guns would condemn people such as yourself to a life confined inside the walls of your house, too afraid to go outside without the instant ability to kill. Think about it. How would you go to work? Or go a movie? You would be consumed with fear every time you left the house, unable to function in society.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Your argument seems to be that guns are necessary for self defence and hunting but the really heavy duty stuff is just fun - for collecting and maybe letting rip in the desert.

All of the above.

Given that your country has serious problems dealing with mental health issues and people have gone berserk with these heavy duty devices, is it a price worth paying for a hobby?

I feel for the families, but I see it differently, had it not been for that good samaritan that ran out with his own gun and shot that guy, more people would have been murdered, I'm sure of it. So you can make the argument that a person with a gun saved a lot of lives.

I see this repeated a lot of times, but would you acknowledge that eradicating guns solved the issue for Australia? No mass shootings in more than 20 years! 

Great for Australia, but what works for one country, doesn't necessarily work for another.

Its not like the US has ever actually tried gun control seriously and in good faith. Then how can you say it won't solve the issue? On the contrary, you have a perfectly good example in Australia of a country which decided to act in the safety interests of its public, and achieved results America could only dream of.

I see, but I could care less what the Australians do and how they conduct their lives, I'm an American and I live half of my time in the States. The Australians don't have the 2nd amendment we do. I can't relate to them, nor do I have to and they don't have to relate to me. I respect them and their laws, I respect Japan's laws and I respect our 2nd amendment.

It is abundantly clear to me that this gun control issue in America will never be solved, because the NRA has clouded peoples thinking with fear and emotion.

I don't think so, how insulting! You make it seem like every person that owns a gun is incapable of thinking for themselves, come on now. This is where liberals are starting to fall off the edge.

If a country could not bring itself to act after twenty elementary school children were gunned down (Sandy Hook), there is no hope. For some people, their guns are more precious than the lives of strangers, innocent as they may be, and no place getting shot up, be it a church or an elementary school, will change their minds. I just hope there doesn't come a day when it becomes too personal for them and it is their family members who were unfortunately in the wrong place at the wrong time when a deranged person decides to pick up a gun and mow someplace down.

Yeah, anyway....

I don't see the gloom and doom as you or the media wants to make this out to be, Europeans don't ban trucks, they just carry on whenever a tragedy like that happens and they have been happening with more frequency. We do what we think is right for our countries. You refuse to give in the the terrorists and we refuse to give in to the forces of the anti-gun haters that would strip us of our gun rights.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The left's desire to disarm law-abiding citizens has blown up in their face now that the Air Force admits it didn't add this animal's name into the national registery. Liberals are all "don't worry, the gov'ment will take care of you." Yeah, they did a real great job doing that last weekend.

I always carry my .380. It's like my American Express card: I never leave home without it. . . .

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

arrestpaul: Unfortunately for you, you simply do not have the votes to make good on your threat.

Well, I think you mean it's unfortunate for the victims.

Jimizo: is it a price worth paying for a hobby?

I'll go ahead and answer this one for them: Yes, it is. No amount of mass shootings is enough to make any kind of separation between them and their guns. "Not my problem."

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@bass

It is tragic and sad, but what to do? Eradicating guns in the US won't solve the issue.

I see this repeated a lot of times, but would you acknowledge that eradicating guns solved the issue for Australia? No mass shootings in more than 20 years!

Its not like the US has ever actually tried gun control seriously and in good faith. Then how can you say it won't solve the issue? On the contrary, you have a perfectly good example in Australia of a country which decided to act in the safety interests of its public, and achieved results America could only dream of.

It is abundantly clear to me that this gun control issue in America will never be solved, because the NRA has clouded peoples thinking with fear and emotion. If a country could not bring itself to act after twenty elementary school children were gunned down (Sandy Hook), there is no hope. For some people, their guns are more precious than the lives of strangers, innocent as they may be, and no place getting shot up, be it a church or an elementary school, will change their minds. I just hope there doesn't come a day when it becomes too personal for them and it is their family members who were unfortunately in the wrong place at the wrong time when a deranged person decides to pick up a gun and mow someplace down.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Kelley used a Ruder AR-556

Somebody at JT is not doing their job. It was probably a Ruger AR-15, 5.56 mm.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

How's that "well-regulated militia" working out fer ya? - too well-regulated, or too disorganized to be termed a militia?

Funny how some "patriots" are so eager to understand both the meaning and intent of the Second Amendment - "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Someday, the Supreme Court will correctly interpret this amendment- or Congress will force it to do so, and free people from that future will look back in horror at the barbarism we today inflict upon ourselves.

It's not a Second Amendment problem; it's an interpretation problem. Anyone who disagrees must also disagree with the right of the government to proscribe in any way arms ownership - which it does, of course, to a great degree, as anyone who has ever tried to buy an RPG would quickly discover.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

What?

Rights, desires or abilities do not equate to "need"

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@Bass

Your argument seems to be that guns are necessary for self defence and hunting but the really heavy duty stuff is just fun - for collecting and maybe letting rip in the desert.

Given that your country has serious problems dealing with mental health issues and people have gone berserk with these heavy duty devices, is it a price worth paying for a hobby?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

You misunderstand. Having a right to do something does not make it a necessity. Or if America ever allows gay couples to wed you'd have to get married to another man. But no... You have the right to choose and that is not necessity so you haven't answered the question at all.

What?

 I've never hunted, but using a semi- doesn't seem very 'sporting' to me. 

Then how would you know if you’ve never experienced it.

And you also need a large caliber weapon for hunting quail and pheasants? If you do, you're obviously not hunting for meat. There'd be little left of the bird after being shot by a .50 caliber. 

I never said that, but I am a gun collector as well. I like going to a shooting range or in the desert where I can shoot my heart out.

I recently read there's a .950 caliber weapon. I'm happy I live in Japan and don't have to be around civilians with semi-automatic and large caliber weapons.

And?

Pretty scary when people in the US on terrorist watch lists and people with mental problems, in addition to the everyday Joe who could just go off during road rage or some fit of jealousy, can get arms that only the police and military should have.

You can go anywhere and something could happen to you, tomorrow is never promised to any of us.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Switzerland and Canada have similar per capita gun ownership rates when compared to the US yet experience far fewer mass shooting incidents.

The problem is a social problem, not a gun control problem.

It is illegal to murder people, it's illegal for a violent criminal to own a gun, it's illegal for a violent criminal to purchase a gun, it's illegal to sell a gun to a violent criminal, it's illegal to.........

There are a thousand laws that "prevent" people like this from owning any kind of weapon. Laws are useless. Fix the mental health crisis the nation is facing. Start with the media which sensationalizes every incident like this. These lunatics crave the attention they know they will get from their actions. When the media sensationalization stops, the mass murders will decline. Then, make sure that troubled people get the mental health support they need.

As other incidents have demonstrated, a gun is not a necessary tool to kill many people. The problems lie in mental health and religion in most mass murder or terrorism incidents.

You will never be able to repeal the 2nd amendment. Give it up. The support for the 2nd amendment is far, far, far greater than the resistance to it is. You cannot change it even if you try, so find a way to stop these maniacs another way.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The barrels of a 12, 16, 20, and 28 gauge shotguns are all larger than .50 caliber. I assume that you want to ban all shotguns larger that the .410 gauge.

I would like to see a ban on all semi-automatic and automatic weapons that fire large caliber rounds, as well as devices that convert weapons to either. Shotguns that fire pellets? I know most who own them are responsible hunters and sportsman. I don't have one and won't ever have one, and don't like to be around people with guns of any kind. Modus vivendi

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Unfortunately for you, you simply do not have the votes to make good on your threat.

Unfortunately for America, the mass killings will continue for as long as nothing is done.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Black Sabbath - If you fight me on this. then I go after your revolvers, pump-action shotguns, and bolt-action rifles.

Don't like it? Too bad.

Unfortunately for you, you simply do not have the votes to make good on your threat.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

PTownsend - And you also need a large caliber weapon for hunting quail and pheasants? If you do, you're obviously not hunting for meat. There'd be little left of the bird after being shot by a .50 caliber.

The barrels of a 12, 16, 20, and 28 gauge shotguns are all larger than .50 caliber. I assume that you want to ban all shotguns larger that the .410 gauge.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

MrBum - Don't need to repeal it. Just go back to a strict interpretation of it. It does specifically include the words "well-regulated."

Back to a strict interpretation? Why do gun banners insist on taking the wording of the 2nd Amendment out of context?

When the U.S. Bill of (Individual) Rights was written, when it was ratified, when it was added to the U.S. Constitution, the BoR identified the rights of an individual. The BoR placed limits on the newly formed government. It did not establish the rights of the government. It did not guarentee the rights of a government militia. The BoR established limits as to what the newly formed government could do.

All five references to "the people" listed in the BoR refer to the individual, not to the government, and not to a government militia. The 2nd Amendment specifically includes the words "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

so who is the chief of police of Sutherland Springs?

The city does not have a police department. Probably relies on the county or the state for law enforcement..

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@bass But deer, Quail and Pheasants are abundant.

You've written before that you need a semi-automatic for hunting deer. Like I've written, I've never hunted, but using a semi- doesn't seem very 'sporting' to me.

And you also need a large caliber weapon for hunting quail and pheasants? If you do, you're obviously not hunting for meat. There'd be little left of the bird after being shot by a .50 caliber.

I recently read there's a .950 caliber weapon. I'm happy I live in Japan and don't have to be around civilians with semi-automatic and large caliber weapons. Pretty scary when people in the US on terrorist watch lists and people with mental problems, in addition to the everyday Joe who could just go off during road rage or some fit of jealousy, can get arms that only the police and military should have.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

If you had been in that church AND you had a firearm on you, would you have taken a dive into the pews? Or would you have shot that crazy, sad  mfr?  Give your granny a snub nose and make sure she knows how to use it. ( i ain't American btw...)  Gun haters don't realise their argument is like saying that because we men all have a peanuts in our pants,  we're all gonna think about using it to assault a woman.  Keep poison, pornography and firing pins away from kids and crazies. 

and i agree to eliminate high power weapons.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Because it’s my right and I can do it, simple as that.

You misunderstand. Having a right to do something does not make it a necessity. Or if America ever allows gay couples to wed you'd have to get married to another man. But no... You have the right to choose and that is not necessity so you haven't answered the question at all.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Aside from the 'it's my right' argument, and the thrill some get shooting big guns, why would any American need a weapon that shoots large caliber rounds?

Because it’s my right and I can do it, simple as that.

Mammoths have long been extinct in the Americas, same with saber tooth tigers and dire wolves. 

But deer, Quail and Pheasants are abundant.

How long until the next whacko with a gun uses a legally purchased .50 caliber semi-automatic weapon on innocent people? But I know gun rights extremists will just say it can't be helped. Let's pray. And the guns industries will get richer. And the public will pay higher taxes to cover the expenses of more gun crimes.

Probably, but confiscating guns won’t resolve the issue, that is with certainty.

Yes it would.

No, it wouldn’t.

Do you think he could have walked into a church with waffles and killed all these people? 

No, but he could’ve ploughed a truck through the church or mowed people over with a car or truck.

And once again we have the WH saying, "Now is not the time to politicize this" when a white man goes on a gun rampage. But had his skin been a different color Trump himself would have on the same day been tweeting about terrorism.

Ahhh, the race card again? Lol

Don't need to repeal it. Just go back to a strict interpretation of it. It does specifically include the words "well-regulated." And bombs, grenades, missles, etc. are "arms" too, but we're fine outlawing those.

No, I would fight tooth and nail if legislation came up for that.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

"This isn't a guns situation" -- it ABSOLUTELY IS a guns situation. Here is why -- the gunman used a military weapon (semi-automatic AR-15 type assault rifle) which has ZERO uses for ordinary citizens. Self-defense? -- NOPE. Hunting? -- NOPE. Target practice? -- NOPE. Its one and ONLY use is in warfare. This CANNOT be denied.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

While in a war torn country a few years back, people didn't have guns in their houses. If a siren sounded, milita would rally people and deliver guns for self defense. If Americans really need guns for self defense, they should have such a system. Who needs automatic guns in their house or car?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

bass4funk: "Eradicating guns in the US won't solve the issue"

Yes it would. Do you think he could have walked into a church with waffles and killed all these people?

And once again we have the WH saying, "Now is not the time to politicize this" when a white man goes on a gun rampage. But had his skin been a different color Trump himself would have on the same day been tweeting about terrorism.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

How is this a gun control issue?

Gun control is part of the problem and, surely, the solution.

The truth is there were probably many opportunities along the way to stop this, either with mental health support or gun control or both, but pretending it’s “evil” and not part of the human condition is a great way to avoid having to do anything about it.

Agree. Thing is there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of ppl like this guy in America, this is not an isolated case, that's why they shouldn't have access to guns. Perso what shocked me most in this article is that murderer's lifelong health and social problems were downplayed or even ignored, like it's normal to date a 13yo, threaten ppl, have a history of DV, be cruel to animals yet join the military, get married etc. Who date/marry/give a job to ppl like this? Is that what we call 'white trash/cracka' America?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

How is this a gun control issue?

Because the country is so awash in guns that even unlicensed loons have easy access. Gun control and it's relaxing by the NRA has everything to do with manufacturers flooding the country with guns.

He was apparently posting his guns up on facebook. Someone should have known that given his criminal background he was not allowed to own them.

Agreed, gun-advocates should be better at monitoring their own. It's the least they could do.

Reduce killing sprees by fixing mental health.

How do you "fix" mental health? Throw anyone with issues in an asylum? Monitor them 24/7? You realize these incidents are the first offense for some shooters, and psychology isn't an exact science. Should we watch / lock away all of them just to be sure? Take away their freedom instead of just their guns? Is that preferable / more realistic to you?

If you actually thought about it instead of just saying it, you'd realize that it's more complex and difficult than reducing/eliminating guns.

You will never be able to disarm the US, the 2nd amendment is too powerful. It won't be repealed.

Don't need to repeal it. Just go back to a strict interpretation of it. It does specifically include the words "well-regulated." And bombs, grenades, missles, etc. are "arms" too, but we're fine outlawing those.

Find another way.

While you're finding another way, people are dying.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The guy was not legally allowed to possess firearms. There already are gun control laws that cover this situation.

There are laws and he jumped through the hoops. He was able to pass background checks because the government screwed up, not because he stole the gun.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/air-force-mistake-kept-texas-shooters-conviction-off-background-check-database-report/article/2639807

Air Force admits bureaucratic error allowed Texas shooter to buy gun used in mass shooting

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Did the gunman's 2nd Amendments rights entitle him to take people's lives away from them? If not, then there was an inadequacy in Sutherland Springs' crime prevention ... so who is the chief of police of Sutherland Springs? Is the media going to ask him/her why their force is so inadequate that 26 lost their lives? He/she would only start jabbering about "the investigation" -- well, we don't want to hear that because we NEVER get to see or hear of the results.

Does the NRA, or anyone else, have a way of keeping guns out of the hands of people with "mental health problems?" I don't think so -- therefore taking the guns out of society is the best option available to us at this time, although it may be less than ideal for some.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

How is this a gun control issue?

The guy was not legally allowed to possess firearms. There already are gun control laws that cover this situation.

Criminals, especially deranged ones with suicidal intent, do not obey gun laws.

His guns were obtained illegally and his possession of them should have been picked up by someone. He was apparently posting his guns up on facebook. Someone should have known that given his criminal background he was not allowed to own them.

Where was this guy's mental health support?

Reduce killing sprees by fixing mental health.

You will never be able to disarm the US, the 2nd amendment is too powerful. It won't be repealed.

Find another way.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

should be more armed law-abiding citizens instead of more gun control

It's probably just a coincidence that the NRA and gun lobbyists give you a solution that directly benefits their bottom line.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

It was an NRA weapons instructor that helped in dropping this killer like a bad habit.

Also, I totally agree with Ken Paxton when he said the response to the church shooting near where I live should be more armed law-abiding citizens instead of more gun control. . . .

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

For those pimping the idea that it's a mental health issue, there are a few things to look at.

First, with the changes in the health insurance law we will see fewer people with health insurance so fewer people with access to mental care. So that will make the problem worse.

Second, I've heard of people talking about asylums, but no gun supporter in Congress has shown any research or bill on doing at. So that leads me to believe it's just lip service until the headlines die down.

Even if it weren't, gun supporters and the NRA will fight tooth and nail to keep as many people cleared to buy guns whether they have a mental illness or not. Trump just rolled back a regulation that said if you are too mentally incompetent to handle your finances (I.e. someone else is appointed), the you can't get a gun. So now even those poeple can get guns.

And these are the politicians who will come up with the mental health plan to protect us?

All we can do is say that we've chosen to live in a society with guns and with that comes mass shootings and it will never end and hopefully it will only kill people you don't know.

Let's just be honest about it and free up out time/resources for other problems.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

And ban all devices that can convert weaponry to semi- and fully automatic. 

I can definitely see it if these extreme events continue on a monthly basis. Probably on a state by state basis. Restrictions on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already happened in New York after the Sandy Hook Massacre and Colorado after Aurora.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Well it's a good thing we have easy access to guns for people like this.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

We now know how he was able to purchase a gun when he fell into a category of people not allowed to purchase nor own a gun in the US. The USAF forgot to enter his court martial conviction into the federal database.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/us/texas-shooting-church.html

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Also, ban the sales of .50 caliber and other large caliber ammo and weapons.

@bass That's probably never going to happen.

Aside from the 'it's my right' argument, and the thrill some get shooting big guns, why would any American need a weapon that shoots large caliber rounds? Mammoths have long been extinct in the Americas, same with saber tooth tigers and dire wolves.

How long until the next whacko with a gun uses a legally purchased .50 caliber semi-automatic weapon on innocent people? But I know gun rights extremists will just say it can't be helped. Let's pray. And the guns industries will get richer. And the public will pay higher taxes to cover the expenses of more gun crimes.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The motive will probably never be known, but the reason is very clear. Take a random sample of a million people and within that group I'm sure you'll find at least one who is just a few steps from being a homicidal maniac. Then make guns as easy to buy as a pack of cigarettes and then most likely you'll have weekly mass murders.  

Gun lovers won't like it, but how did we eliminate the danger of terrorists taking over airliners? We made everyone suffer the indignity of going through the TSA gauntlet. Unless the gun community is willing to accept the kind of restrictions we apply to boarding an airliner to the purchase of guns, it is guaranteed mass murders will be common place.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Yet our cowardly American leaders and lawmakers promise us that there is absolutely nothing they can do to stop the carnage. We just have to tolerate it.  

It is tragic and sad, but what to do? Eradicating guns in the US won't solve the issue, but now that we know the man was deeply disturbed, it's high time we revisit the possibility of reopening mental asylums to allow people to be evaluated that could pose a potential threat and if so, they would be committed and kept and cared for until proven able to function well in society and not pose a threat to society.

Also, ban the sales of .50 caliber and other large caliber ammo and weapons.

That's probably never going to happen.

-16 ( +1 / -17 )

So, let's do it. Ban all automatic and semi-automatic weapons. Ban them now.

Agreed. And ban all devices that can convert weaponry to semi- and fully automatic. Enact and enforce tougher laws on those caught converting. Also, ban the sales of .50 caliber and other large caliber ammo and weapons.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Over the past few weeks almost 1000 innocent American fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, wives, husbands, sons, and daughters have been violently slaughtered at random in America. Yet our cowardly American leaders and lawmakers promise us that there is absolutely nothing they can do to stop the carnage. We just have to tolerate it.  

I say it's time to throw every last one of them out on their ear.

12 ( +13 / -1 )

It's a gun control issue.

The shooter illegally got hold of very powerful guns because even the pathetically weak laws are not enforced.

It's a gun control issue.

So, let's do it. Ban all automatic and semi-automatic weapons. Ban them now.

'Cause nothing short of that will prevent another shooting like this. Nothing.

12 ( +13 / -1 )

@Abbeyroad

But I like my morality simple. The Daily Mail says it like it is. No place for intelligence or nuanced thought.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

These people always give many warning signs and red flags before these things happen. It’s not like he woke up one day and was like hm I think I’ll kill people. That’s why all the handwringing about “evil” is so useless. It’s just a dodge to avoid doing anything. The truth is there were probably many opportunities along the way to stop this, either with mental health support or gun control or both, but pretending it’s “evil” and not part of the human condition is a great way to avoid having to do anything about it.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

To inspire hardcore single issue voters you have to take an absolutist stance on things. The NRA is clear:

American's have the absolute right to freely buy, own and sell automatic and semi-automatic weapons; And have access to a magazine capacity and an amo quality good enough to destroy an army battalion.

To that end, they peddle and probably belief insane crap: like guns don't kill people (then why own them and not potato peeler?). And Jesus loves guns.

Fair enough. That's how they took what was a gun safety organization and turned it into a cult.

So, here my stance. Its nice and simple:

Ban all automatic and semi-automatic weapons. Ban them now. You can keep your revolvers, pump-action shotguns, and bolt-action rifles.

If you fight me on this. then I go after your revolvers, pump-action shotguns, and bolt-action rifles.

Don't like it? Too bad.

14 ( +15 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites