'Mass shooting' reported at Sutherland Springs church in Texas
Several people were reportedly shot and killed on Sunday after a “mass shooting” at a Texas church, police said.
The shooting was reported at First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs, which is about 30 miles southeast of San Antonio. A witness told KSAT that a man walked into the church about 11:30 a.m. Sunday and opened fire at the crowd of people. The church holds morning worship services at 11 a.m., according to its website.
Constable Thomas Silvas from Precinct 1 in Wilson County confirmed to Fox News there was a "mass shooting" situation and that officials were working on removing the bodies from the church, but did not specify the number of people who were dead or wounded.
Silvas did not provide further details on the incident.
"We have accepted a number of patients from the shooting," Megan Posey, a spokeswoman for Connally Memorial Medical Center in Floresville, 15 miles from church, told Fox News. She said she did not have a specific number. She said doctors were assessing the patients.
Helicopters and emergency personnel were seen arriving at the scene.
Texas Governor Greg Abbott tweeted shortly after the incident was reported: “Our prayers are with all who were harmed by this evil act. Our thanks to law enforcement for their response. More details from DPS soon.”
Fox News' Robert Gearty contributed to this report.
It felt weird at first carrying in church, but I believe they will be specifically targeted like this one was in the (apparently not too distant) future. Sad that liberals can't see the error of their thinking, since it's never a conservative doing this kind of thing.
What could possibly be a reason to go to a church and shoot anyone, let alone that many. The only consolation is that the shooter's soul will burn in Hell for eternity.
Yes special place in hell for sure.People who do this kind of evil act have no soul. That's what terrorists do.they make you feel there are no places that are safe.
Yes special place in hell for sure.People who do this kind of evil act have no soul. That's what terrorists do.they make you feel there are no places that are safe.
This small town is literally just a wide spot in the road. Remote and rural. If you are not safe there, you aren't safe anywhere.
From what I'm gathering, the suspect tried to escape when police showed up, and a pursuit was taking place, but didn't go far. Shooter was killed. Unknown where by his own hand or police.
Just heard a Texas congressman state this is the reason we need a limit on "clip" size, if he only had 8 bullets this would not happen. His name was Vincent Gonzoles, 15 District. When asked what weapon he used he said he did not know but it had to have been an assault weapon.
What a horrible act. Now there will be a call to outlaw guns, and if they were to become illegal, the next monster would/could use a firebomb, truck or some other evil way to accomplish such an act. How can we as a society protect ourselves from such terror?
Just heard a Texas congressman state this is the reason we need a limit on "clip" size, if he only had 8 bullets this would not happen. His name was Vincent Gonzoles, 15 District. When asked what weapon he used he said he did not know but it had to have been an assault weapon.
And if we made Illegals Illegal, we wouldn't have any in this country. Meth et al are illegal too, how's that working out.
I am heartsick hearing of this. What could possess somebody to do something such as this? I can't believe our country has spawned such evil. God help those who lost loved ones.
I am heartsick hearing of this. What could possess somebody to do something such as this? I can't believe our country has spawned such evil. God help those who lost loved ones.
That kind of evil has been actively cultivated in our nation.
I have a friend who is a note worthy author I am sure some of you would recognize him. He is aging and in tough shape He only goes to the Doctor and Church (he is Mormon not that it makes and difference). Just a few weeks ago he told me Satan would strike churches When he goes he carries a 40 auto pistol and in a computer bag a folding Keltec at the minimum
Thank you Jaysus for the Texas Attorney General. His comments are we don't need more gun control but LESS gun laws so more people can carry everywhere and mitigate this threat. Thank GOD for Texas.
Reporting the pastor's 14 yr old daughter was killed; horrible
This caused my pretty tough wife to cry openly and my eyes to wet a bit.
The only viable to limit these incidents is to have "protectors" in churches, much like sky marshals. It's a sad state of affairs, made worse by social media and violent media and movies.
I am heartsick hearing of this. What could possess somebody to do something such as this? I can't believe our country has spawned such evil. God help those who lost loved ones.
That kind of evil has been actively cultivated in our nation.
Actively cultivated, supported and nourished by a violent leftist agenda and a complicit MSN that’s “constitutionally” protected.
My prayers for the innocent victims, God fearing folks that this world needs more not less of.
A month ago, we had a stranger come to out very small church, congregation size, wanting money. The pastor told him that we would take up a collection for him at the end of services, making him sit there for 2 hours. For some reason that day, my 380 was in my pocket. I usually either have one on me, or in the car at church. From this day forward, I will carry every Sunday. It's gotten to the point that you never know.
Thank you Jaysus for the Texas Attorney General. His comments are we don't need more gun control but LESS gun laws so more people can carry everywhere and mitigate this threat. Thank GOD for Texas.
A month ago, we had a stranger come to out very small church, congregation size, wanting money. The pastor told him that we would take up a collection for him at the end of services, making him sit there for 2 hours. For some reason that day, my 380 was in my pocket. I usually either have one on me, or in the car at church. From this day forward, I will carry every Sunday. It's gotten to the point that you never know.
It was my routine to carry in Church when I was a regular. Never occurred to me to look into whether I had special permission to do it, either.
I carry everywhere 24/7 unless there’s an X-ray or metal detector. My life and the lives of my family will not be dictated by bullshit, leftist, unconstitutional laws or policies.
A month ago, we had a stranger come to out very small church, congregation size, wanting money. The pastor told him that we would take up a collection for him at the end of services, making him sit there for 2 hours. For some reason that day, my 380 was in my pocket. I usually either have one on me, or in the car at church. From this day forward, I will carry every Sunday. It's gotten to the point that you never know.
My church addressed situations such as this a few years ago. Some thought we were "gun happy". Now we have at least six trained and authorized people in the congregation every service to help prevent such an attempt. Sadly shooting like this is becoming a common theme. Prayers for all!
It hadn't been mentioned yet in the news but I bet this church banned concealed carry on their property. According to witnesses at the gas station the shooting lasted about 15 seconds. That's a really long time when somebody is shooting at you and you can't shoot back.
This. Who can understand such a deed? Just can't wrap my mind around this sort of thing. God be with the families and friends of the victims and may He heal the wounded.
According to witnesses at the gas station the shooting lasted about 15 seconds. That's a really long time when somebody is shooting at you and you can't shoot back.
15 seconds? To kill or wound 55+ people? Either the witnesses underestimate the amount of time the shooting went down, or we're going to find out some info about modified/fully auto/bumpfire stocked weapons.
It hadn't been mentioned yet in the news but I bet this church banned concealed carry on their property. According to witnesses at the gas station the shooting lasted about 15 seconds. That's a really long time when somebody is shooting at you and you can't shoot back.
Weapons are not mentioned one way or the other in the church by laws.
A month ago, we had a stranger come to out very small church, congregation size, wanting money. The pastor told him that we would take up a collection for him at the end of services, making him sit there for 2 hours. For some reason that day, my 380 was in my pocket. I usually either have one on me, or in the car at church. From this day forward, I will carry every Sunday. It's gotten to the point that you never know.
50 years ago you could walk into a hardware store, pay cash for a firearm, no background, no 10 day wait, no registration, just walk out the door..and you know what, this crap was not going on. Ignore the societal rot and hate created by the left, and concentrate on a hunk of metal and plastic, that is a lot easier than trying to deal with the real problem, the problem our society has created.
It hadn't been mentioned yet in the news but I bet this church banned concealed carry on their property. According to witnesses at the gas station the shooting lasted about 15 seconds. That's a really long time when somebody is shooting at you and you can't shoot back.
Most Baptist churches are fairly conservative. I doubt they would ban them.
Scanning a few of their videos, it appears to be just what it is. A rural, informal church with a small congregation. Mostly whites, but I did see some minorities present.
Most of the people in this video are now dead or wounded now.
50 years ago you could walk into a hardware store, pay cash for a firearm, no background, no 10 day wait, no registration, just walk out the door..and you know what, this crap was not going on. Ignore the societal rot and hate created by the left, and concentrate on a hunk of metal and plastic, that is a lot easier than trying to deal with the real problem, the problem our society has created.
A month ago, we had a stranger come to out very small church, congregation size, wanting money. The pastor told him that we would take up a collection for him at the end of services, making him sit there for 2 hours. For some reason that day, my 380 was in my pocket. I usually either have one on me, or in the car at church. From this day forward, I will carry every Sunday. It's gotten to the point that you never know.
50 years ago you could walk into a hardware store, pay cash for a firearm, no background, no 10 day wait, no registration, just walk out the door..and you know what, this crap was not going on. Ignore the societal rot and hate created by the left, and concentrate on a hunk of metal and plastic, that is a lot easier than trying to deal with the real problem, the problem our society has created.
Don't forget, in addition, you could order rifles, handguns, and shotguns through the mail and have them delivered to your door ... no waiting, registration, background checks, etc.
Same thing, no mass murder sprees ... other than the mafia killing each other.
I put heavy odds on some liberal filled with hate and anger, but suddenly hate and anger won't be anything brought on my liberal hyperbole and hate, it will become a mystery as to why this happens..therefore getting rid of guns will be the easy remedy.
Was apparently engaged by a local resident with a weapon at some point during the atrocities.
Just heard that as well. They said the chicken-chit-shooter had started shooting outside the church and went inside. At some point, he was engaged by a CITIZEN WITH A GUN and the chicken-chit-shooter fled the scene. The chicken-chit-shooter was pursued by the CITIZEN WITH A GUN and the chicken-chit-shooter ended up crashing his vehicle. They found the chicken-chit-shooter dead of a gun shot wound but aren't sure if it was self-inflicted or from the HEROIC CITIZEN.
Arm yourself, and get proficient with your weapon. Your life, and your friends and family's life may well depend on it.
Simply ignore the gun control screechers. We all know that gun control would not have stopped this. In fact, it's looking like a gun may have ended this rampage.
In the Baptist church where I grew up designated men who carry concealed are spaced at strategic spots around the auditorium and entry, every service. Some of them are deacons, some off duty LEO. About 25 years ago they decided to quietly organize it just enough to make sure that all of the space was always covered. Anyone attending would never know.
I put heavy odds on some liberal filled with hate and anger, but suddenly hate and anger won't be anything brought on my liberal hyperbole and hate, it will become a mystery as to why this happens..therefore getting rid of guns will be the easy remedy.
Devin Kelly, who killed at least 27 people and injured many more, was one of two shooters in the church, according to eyewitnesses, who also report Kelly carried an Antifa flag and told the churchgoers “this is a communist revolution” before unloading on the congregation, reloading several times.
Back in the frontier days of Pennsylvania, churchgoers carried their long rifles to their houses of worship. A good idea whose time has returned. Albeit with a Glock or a 1911 in place of the long rifle.
The choice of the day is no coincidence either. All of these Antifa idiots style themselves as revolutionaries and the movie “V for Vendetta” that is a cult classic in those circles featured a guy running around in a Guy Fawkes mask starting a revolution in a fictional modern fascist England. For instance the queers at Anonymous wear Guy Fawkes masks whenever they make an announcement.
Back in the frontier days of Pennsylvania, churchgoers carried their long rifles to their houses of worship. A good idea whose time has returned. Albeit with a Glock or a 1911 in place of the long rifle.
"Thy [the Highlanders] always appeared like warriors; as if their arms had been limbs and members of their bodies they were never seen without them; they traveled, they attended fairs and markets, nay they went to church with their broadswords and dirks." -- John Hume
This is why you should carry at Church. Churches should not be soft targets.
Agreed, but a house of worship is one of the places you can not carry, without permission. (As per Ohio law. YMMV)
This is true. The thing is that's in the law and the church believes if it gives permission it incurs liability. Probably true on that. But if the law didn't say that and the church didn't prohibit then I think no liability would take place.
Devin Kelly, who killed at least 27 people and injured many more, was one of two shooters in the church, according to eyewitnesses, who also report Kelly carried an Antifa flag and told the churchgoers “this is a communist revolution” before unloading on the congregation, reloading several times.
Interesting. So he was acting on the AntiFa threat.
Back in the frontier days of Pennsylvania, churchgoers carried their long rifles to their houses of worship. A good idea whose time has returned. Albeit with a Glock or a 1911 in place of the long rifle.
Just heard the service was being taped, so hopefully they get to the bottom of this terrible tragedy. What a piece of chit. So sad for everyone involved
Back in the frontier days of Pennsylvania, churchgoers carried their long rifles to their houses of worship. A good idea whose time has returned. Albeit with a Glock or a 1911 in place of the long rifle.
The fellow that engaged him should be given a medal.
With Trump in the Whitehouse, he just might! If Obama/Clinton were running the show, they wouldn't buy him a beer......
Lol...MAGA.
We either have to lose more sorry Americans or make more great ones. The Whitehouse ain't gonna do shat without that.
I ain't laughing at any of this but you got that right. And I know you're not really laughing either. This sucks. Hopefully we get more and better info released to the public than the Vegas thing but I know the investigation needs to take its course before things are made public. Sad deal all around.
Preacher in the local Baptist church my wife and I attended for many years came to us asked us to carry during the service. He had a Kar 40 in his pocket, my wife had a 38 revolver in her purse at her feet in the choir behind him and I carried a 380 while sitting at the rear door. We had all entrances and exits covered. Most members were elderly and we were the only ones who he trusted to do so. Church is in a poor and now immigrant area of town and this was necessary. Don't know what they are doing today as we left several years ago. I don't think anyone knew what we were doing at the time.....although one lady who always hugged me must have know cause she had to feel the shoulder holster I used.....and when several ladies wanted me to join the choir they were told " he sits there cause Jim (preacher) wants him to sit there.....".... Like others above, I don't go anywhere without carrying.....
A month ago, we had a stranger come to out very small church, congregation size, wanting money. The pastor told him that we would take up a collection for him at the end of services, making him sit there for 2 hours. For some reason that day, my 380 was in my pocket. I usually either have one on me, or in the car at church. From this day forward, I will carry every Sunday. It's gotten to the point that you never know.
This is why you should carry at Church. Churches should not be soft targets.
Agreed, but a house of worship is one of the places you can not carry, without permission. (As per Ohio law. YMMV)
Rather be judged than carried....
Yep. Few are prosecuted, but here that gun free sign is law. If it is properly posted, the ACT of defying it IS punishable by law. It does NOT come down to being asked to leave and refusing. I would suggest discussing it with the preacher. Consent is all you need.
This is why you should carry at Church. Churches should not be soft targets.
Agreed, but a house of worship is one of the places you can not carry, without permission. (As per Ohio law. YMMV)
Unless the church makes folks walk through a metal detector to get in, there is nothing to stop an otherwise lawful concealed weapon carrier from attending church services with his weapon. Properly concealed, no one will know he has it. And he, his family, and the rest of the congregation are safer for his unauthorized action.
Since many churches do have organized, armed, plain-clothed security committees, care would have to be taken not to be mistaken for another bad guy, but I am more willing to take my chances armed, than to follow silly rules that create an unnecessary assemblage of unarmed victims.
Apparently no one in this small Texas church was armed, or able to respond. It was a neighbor that showed up with his personal shotgun that prevented this tragedy from being much worse.
A bad guy can bring a gun in just as easily, and a rule or law won't stop him. If a bad guy commits a shooting and a good guy with a gun stops him, I would consider the good guy to be a hero. I can't imagine any jury would convict him for violating the rule about bringing his gun to church. And any DA that tried to charge him would hopefully get voted out of office.
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
While there's a lot there in your post to work with, please put your vagina hat on and STFU for the remainder of the thread while the men discuss things. We'll get back to you in another thread later.
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
While there's a lot there in your post to work with, please put your vagina hat on and STFU for the remainder of the thread while the men discuss things. We'll get back to you in another thread later.
As a youth, I frequently chewed gum in class, which was against the rules. Oftentimes there wasn't much chewing being done, but the gum was in my mouth, never the less.
I was very stealthy about it, and considered it a challenge not to get caught. I never did get caught, either, after I became serious about the challenge of it.
I understood why the rule against chewing gum was in place. My attitude was that if no one knew, or could tell, that I was chewing gum, then it didn't matter, and I was actually complying with the spirit of the law, while violating the letter of the law. And I always properly disposed of the gum, or swallowed it. My attitude was no harm, no foul.
I frequently feel the same way about my concealed weapon. If nobody knows it is there, then there shouldn't be any problem.
If I ever really have to produce my pistol in a dire situation, the fact of whether I am standing just inside the church, or just outside the church, will be the least of my worries.
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
He had a Bad Conduct Discharge, from what I've read.
Most of them here do! My Baptist Church allows it and I do. Always! ... About six years ago, we went to the ex wives [b]Methodist Church. They banned carry there[/b] and I never attended that Church again! ..."
That is not surprising. The hierarchy of the United Methodist Church was a co-founder of Handgun Control, Inc., many years ago. Its policy thereafter has been to crusade for and support the banning and confiscation of our firearms.
I was raised a Methodist. Haven't been in many years and have no intention of ever going back.
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
You stupid liberal phuuck..
Dishorably discharges are the civilian equilient of a felony.
Disgonorably discharched "vets" cannot own or purchase ANY Firearms under current Federal law-
"A person who is convicted of a crime that is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year ( including a dishonorable discharge) is prohibited from possessing a firearm. Under 18 U.S.C. 922(g), a felon who is found guilty of gun possession may serve up to 10 years in prison."
Didn’t read through whole thread but wife alerted me to this shooting while I was out working she also stated it’s the same date today as the Fort Hood shooting. Don’t know if anyone mentioned that or if it’s been discussed.
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
You stupid liberal phuuck..
Dishorably discharges are the civilian equilient of a felony.
Disgonorably discharched "vets" cannot own or purchase ANY Firearms under current Federal law-
"A person who is convicted of a crime that is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year ( including a dishonorable discharge) is prohibited from possessing a firearm. Under 18 U.S.C. 922(g), a felon who is found guilty of gun possession may serve up to 10 years in prison."
Real men look for real solutions, not the typical knee jerk responses you guys repeat again and again with the situation getting worse and worse. Obviously more good guys with guns is not solving the problem. Weeding out the crazies, malcontents and dishonorably discharged needs to be tested and evaluated. Just think, I said that without using disparaging childish language. This forum could use more civility.
Apologize if this has been already posted. This interview is from an eyewitness who lived across the street and watched his neighbor engage the shooter.
Real men look for real solutions, not the typical knee jerk responses you guys repeat again and again with the situation getting worse and worse. Obviously more good guys with guns is not solving the problem. Weeding out the crazies, malcontents and dishonorably discharged needs to be tested and evaluated. Just think, I said that without using disparaging childish language. This forum could use more civility.
I think the Gentlemen's point was, or should be, that he was already a "prohibited person". What law would have stopped him?
I put heavy odds on some liberal filled with hate and anger, but suddenly hate and anger won't be anything brought on my liberal hyperbole and hate, it will become a mystery as to why this happens..therefore getting rid of guns will be the easy remedy.
Plus, undiagnosed mental health issues.
kwg
Who's to say they are undiagnosed? At best people with severe mental disorders are prescribed drugs that may make them less crazy, or may make them more crazy. As a rule the mentally ill are left to roam free in society.
Real men look for real solutions, not the typical knee jerk responses you guys repeat again and again with the situation getting worse and worse. Obviously more good guys with guns is not solving the problem. Weeding out the crazies, malcontents and dishonorably discharged needs to be tested and evaluated. Just think, I said that without using disparaging childish language. This forum could use more civility.
Are you really unaware of the federal laws on the books that make it illegal for a dishonorably discharged veteran to buy or even possess a firearm? That existing law obviously did not prevent this tragedy. Why do you think another new law would?
Gentlemen, regardless of viewpoint, debate is best carried out in a civilized manner. We may differ in philosophy, experience, knowledge, or solutions, and still be civil. The fact of the matter, is simply that no Law has the ability to stop a bad person from committing evil. All any law CAN do, is control or restrict the law abiding citizen. Murder is already illegal, the killer is already illegal to possess a gun, and no Law or sign could have made the folks in the church any safer. (Only more likely to die, because the lawful follow rules the lawless ignore.) This is another proof, that gun control does not work.
Real men look for real solutions, not the typical knee jerk responses you guys repeat again and again with the situation getting worse and worse. Obviously more good guys with guns is not solving the problem. Weeding out the crazies, malcontents and dishonorably discharged needs to be tested and evaluated. Just think, I said that without using disparaging childish language. This forum could use more civility.
Are you really unaware of the federal laws on the books that make it illegal for a dishonorably discharged veteran to buy or even possess a firearm? That existing law obviously did not prevent this tragedy. Why do you think another new law would?
Because he is a true blue Liberal, pretty simple really.
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
Bad Conduct Discharge is not the same as a DD. Couldn't cut it in the USAF. Good grief.
That picture of his Ruger shows stupidity. Put a SBR picture on Facebook when he didn't have a stamp for it (I'd bet anyway). It may have been a pistol that he configured as a SBR too. Either way a complete DUMB AZZ on top of being a EVIL FOCK. Only good news today was him checking out at the hand of some armed citizenry.
I have a real close friend that was there today (afterwards) and it is a terrible tragedy that someone didn't get some rounds pointed his way sooner.
Civility is only afforded to folks with common sense, Stupid is not tolerated around here very well. If you continue to get your feelers hurt you might want to find another site to frequent.
Real men look for real solutions, not the typical knee jerk responses you guys repeat again and again with the situation getting worse and worse. Obviously more good guys with guns is not solving the problem. Weeding out the crazies, malcontents and dishonorably discharged needs to be tested and evaluated. Just think, I said that without using disparaging childish language. This forum could use more civility.
Yeah. Tell us all about how the citizenry was safe under the gun control in place when Hitler killed 12 million of them. How many million died under your heros Stalin and Mao.
I'd bet money it was not a legal SBR! But you can bet your ass the Demotards will go after the legal SBR owners with a Federal Stamp in an attempt to blame it on the gun. No photos have been released by LEO yet to show it was an AR.
FOX reporting now that the shooter "may" have taught bible study at that Church. God I hope not!
Again, Prayers for all the victims and their family's !
A Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD), colloquially referred to as a "big chicken dinner", from the initialism,[16] can only be given by a court-martial (either special or general) as punishment to an enlisted service-member. Bad conduct discharges are often preceded by a period of confinement in a military prison. The discharge itself is not executed until completion of both confinement and the appellate review process.
Virtually all veterans' benefits are forfeited by a Bad Conduct Discharge; BCD recipients are not eligible for VA disability compensation in accordance with 38 CFR 3.12.
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
Do you seriously not know that someone with a DD cannot legally purchase a firearm, or are you pointing out he illegally possessed it?
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
Do you seriously not know that someone with a DD cannot legally purchase a firearm, or are you pointing out he illegally possessed it?
He is trying quite successfully to prove what a dumbass he is.
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
Do you seriously not know that someone with a DD cannot legally purchase a firearm, or are you pointing out he illegally possessed it?
Real men look for real solutions, not the typical knee jerk responses you guys repeat again and again with the situation getting worse and worse. Obviously more good guys with guns is not solving the problem. Weeding out the crazies, malcontents and dishonorably discharged needs to be tested and evaluated. Just think, I said that without using disparaging childish language. This forum could use more civility.
And yet your knee jerk reaction always seems to be sounding like a liberal khount?
Most of them here do! My Baptist Church allows it and I do. Always! ... About six years ago, we went to the ex wives [b]Methodist Church. They banned carry there[/b] and I never attended that Church again! ..."
That is not surprising. The hierarchy of the United Methodist Church was a co-founder of Handgun Control, Inc., many years ago. Its policy thereafter has been to crusade for and support the banning and confiscation of our firearms.
I was raised a Methodist. Haven't been in many years and have no intention of ever going back.
L.W.
We go to a UMC that has an organized security team, which I'm part of. Almost everyone on the team is armed, as is our preacher. This kind of mess will necessitate more if the same. Prayers for those folks in Texas.
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
Do you seriously not know that someone with a DD cannot legally purchase a firearm, or are you pointing out he illegally possessed it?
He didn't have a Dishonorable Discharge.
I see that's what's being reported now. First reports I saw did say DD.
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
Do you seriously not know that someone with a DD cannot legally purchase a firearm, or are you pointing out he illegally possessed it?
He is trying quite successfully to prove what a dumbass he is.
This liberal cock has been showing his liberal stripes for some time now.
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government. I have been a commissioned law enforcement officer and have seen many gun possessors who should have been prevented from having one.
It is time to stop this BS that is is us verses them. It is all of us together, and as citizens we need to say who can legitably have guns and who shouldn’t.
You like to write me off as a liberal. I have been a life member of the NRA since 1966. I am a a qualified Master shooter in High Power competition, Sharpshooter in pistol competition and I also shoot skeet and sporting clays. I own two farms and have private rifle and pistol ranges set up on my land. I belong to two shooting clubs. I have three kids who hunt deer and I hunt deer, elk and upland birds every year.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either. The shooter in Texas and the one in Las Vegas are cases in point. Don’t tell me that deeper screening wouldn’t have brought up questions on these two shooters. No, it wouldn’t have stopped all, but it would stop some.
Is there another picture that shows the barrel length of the rifle in question? Then LE said they could not confirm that the gun in the picture was the one used. SBR used?
The AR posted in the shooters Facebook page appears to be a SBR. It's shown with a Magpul collapsible stock and a 40 round Pmag. Like I said in a previous post, I seriously doubt that it had a Federal Tax Stamp. I doubt most Perps care if their gun is legal or not.
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government. I have been a commissioned law enforcement officer and have seen many gun possessors who should have been prevented from having one.
It is time to stop this BS that is is us verses them. It is all of us together, and as citizens we need to say who can legitably have guns and who shouldn’t.
You like to write me off as a liberal. I have been a life member of the NRA since 1966. I am a a qualified Master shooter in High Power competition, Sharpshooter in pistol competition and I also shoot skeet and sporting clays. I own two farms and have private rifle and pistol ranges set up on my land. I belong to two shooting clubs. I have three kids who hunt deer and I hunt deer, elk and upland birds every year.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either. The shooter in Texas and the one in Las Vegas are cases in point. Don’t tell me that deeper screening wouldn’t have brought up questions on these two shooters. No, it wouldn’t have stopped all, but it would stop some.
I've never thought of you as a liberal, just an idiot.
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government. I have been a commissioned law enforcement officer and have seen many gun possessors who should have been prevented from having one.
It is time to stop this BS that is is us verses them. It is all of us together, and as citizens we need to say who can legitably have guns and who shouldn’t.
You like to write me off as a liberal. I have been a life member of the NRA since 1966. I am a a qualified Master shooter in High Power competition, Sharpshooter in pistol competition and I also shoot skeet and sporting clays. I own two farms and have private rifle and pistol ranges set up on my land. I belong to two shooting clubs. I have three kids who hunt deer and I hunt deer, elk and upland birds every year.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either. The shooter in Texas and the one in Las Vegas are cases in point. Don’t tell me that deeper screening wouldn’t have brought up questions on these two shooters. No, it wouldn’t have stopped all, but it would stop some.
If what you type is true you are worse and more dangerous than a know nothing liberal.
I doubt very much that you are a conservative. With all your typings and musings here you being part of the .gov is not much of a surprise.
Oh yeah, I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings......Lol.
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government. I have been a commissioned law enforcement officer and have seen many gun possessors who should have been prevented from having one.
It is time to stop this BS that is is us verses them. It is all of us together, and as citizens we need to say who can legitably have guns and who shouldn’t.
You like to write me off as a liberal. I have been a life member of the NRA since 1966. I am a a qualified Master shooter in High Power competition, Sharpshooter in pistol competition and I also shoot skeet and sporting clays. I own two farms and have private rifle and pistol ranges set up on my land. I belong to two shooting clubs. I have three kids who hunt deer and I hunt deer, elk and upland birds every year.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either. The shooter in Texas and the one in Las Vegas are cases in point. Don’t tell me that deeper screening wouldn’t have brought up questions on these two shooters. No, it wouldn’t have stopped all, but it would stop some.
Minimum security for churches is close the door and don't let anyone in after any event is started , or at least place 2 person at the door.
Which is good but not near enough. I laid it out for one of our pastors as if I was the shooter. I told him if I was a shooter the first thing I would do is take out these people he so obviously have posted. I told him he needs to have visible security but also inconspicuous security. That would be armed individuals among the worshipers who cannot be identified as security.
"I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO."
No sir, you are very wrong. I NEVER have to prove I can have my Rights. If there is ever any doubt, you must PROVE I can't have my Rights. The burden of proof is on YOU, not me. Only under certain conditions can I be stripped of my Rights, and that involves a court. And If you were in law enforcement (As you claim) you should dang well know this. And a "well regulated militia " has nothing to do with this subject. Nothing at all. A well regulated militia 's primary job is to keep Government inline. George Washington said "The Right to bear arms, is second in importance only to the Constitution itself, for it is the People's Teeth. " Without the Second Ammendment, it is just the "Bill of Suggestions ". " Well Rugulated " in trhe parlance of the time, simply means "in good working order ". A clock is well regulated if it keeps good time.
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government. I have been a commissioned law enforcement officer and have seen many gun possessors who should have been prevented from having one.
It is time to stop this BS that is is us verses them. It is all of us together, and as citizens we need to say who can legitably have guns and who shouldn’t.
You like to write me off as a liberal. I have been a life member of the NRA since 1966. I am a a qualified Master shooter in High Power competition, Sharpshooter in pistol competition and I also shoot skeet and sporting clays. I own two farms and have private rifle and pistol ranges set up on my land. I belong to two shooting clubs. I have three kids who hunt deer and I hunt deer, elk and upland birds every year.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either. The shooter in Texas and the one in Las Vegas are cases in point. Don’t tell me that deeper screening wouldn’t have brought up questions on these two shooters. No, it wouldn’t have stopped all, but it would stop some.
I've never thought of you as a liberal, just an idiot.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
And who pray tell sets those standards of qualification? Is it the government who might make them so high nobody can pass? Do you think the government can be trusted to act if a reasonable forthright manner? If you do you are a blind man.
By the way, it's not just the second amendment, it's the 9th too.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist.
An elitist cop who doesn't believe in The Bill of Rights.
What part of "...shall not be infringed." do you not understand?
Cop ;like you who don't believe in The Constitution are one the gravest dangers facing our republic today.
You should be stripped of your badge and sent back to 9th grade Civics class.
Like Pat basically stated as well as others, up to a point, no amount of government or wishing in one hand is going to fix the degradation of our social order. Guns, trucks or a medical license, doesnt matter.
Soo. The good citizen. Did he use a shotgun or rifle? Details? Have heard rifle and shotgun. Heard he fired two shots. Now saying same type firearm??
Fox keeps alternating between a rifle and a shotgun. Evidently the perp drove about 5 miles after being shot and died. The Good Samaritan must have hit a vital organ or an artery.
Soo. The good citizen. Did he use a shotgun or rifle? Details? Have heard rifle and shotgun. Heard he fired two shots. Now saying same type firearm??
Fox keeps alternating between a rifle and a shotgun. Evidently the perp drove about 5 miles after being shot and died. The Good Samaritan must have hit a vital organ or an artery.
Shotgun at that distance covers a lot of real estate. He probably bled out, then lost control of the vehicle as he passed out.
I wonder how the shotgun was choked, and it if was 00 buck or something similar?
Witness reports are saying now that the shooter also wore a black mask. Also police found a "cache" of weapons in his vehicle. Wonder if he had planned to hit other targets after he left the Church ???
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either.
I agree with you on one point; you are an elitist. How would you feel if I told you that you and your family don't meet my criteria to own firearms because your political views are dangerous to my family's welfare and freedom? Sure, we're both law-abiding citizens but, according to me, your political views don't meet the standard for gun ownership. Are you ready to give them up?? If not, why not?? Please don't tell me because you disagree with my OPINION. Do you honestly think Obama would let your family own guns if HE had SUPREME power? What was the best guarantee that he would need to peacefully hand over that power to Trump, a man he detests??
When it comes to firearm ownership, we need to think 100+ years into the future and ask ourselves if we want to leave our family's well being to a person/group who may dislike them or even hate them because of how they look, think, or what they OWN. As for me, I think the safest position a society can take is to ensure we're all able to defend ourselves from whatever, whenever. Short of that, you and your family's well-being is at the mercy of anyone that chooses to do harm or steal from them.
And, since you stated you're a LEO, you know better than anyone that in almost all cases you can't protect me or mine. The best you do 99% of the time (and that's being very generous) is show up and take are "report" on what happened. Not being critical of LE, I know you would if you could, but you can't and that's the truth!
Soo. The good citizen. Did he use a shotgun or rifle? Details? Have heard rifle and shotgun. Heard he fired two shots. Now saying same type firearm??
Fox keeps alternating between a rifle and a shotgun. Evidently the perp drove about 5 miles after being shot and died. The Good Samaritan must have hit a vital organ or an artery.
Makes me think of the jack-wagon that showed up a few years ago with a rifle to shoot a bunch of people and the TX resident killed him with a handgun. Don't mess with Texas!
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government. I have been a commissioned law enforcement officer and have seen many gun possessors who should have been prevented from having one.
It is time to stop this BS that is is us verses them. It is all of us together, and as citizens we need to say who can legitably have guns and who shouldn’t.
You like to write me off as a liberal. I have been a life member of the NRA since 1966. I am a a qualified Master shooter in High Power competition, Sharpshooter in pistol competition and I also shoot skeet and sporting clays. I own two farms and have private rifle and pistol ranges set up on my land. I belong to two shooting clubs. I have three kids who hunt deer and I hunt deer, elk and upland birds every year.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either. The shooter in Texas and the one in Las Vegas are cases in point. Don’t tell me that deeper screening wouldn’t have brought up questions on these two shooters. No, it wouldn’t have stopped all, but it would stop some.
The Constitution and my God given rights to protect my family and myself trump your resume and opinions (neither of which mean chit to me).
"Kelley is a former U.S. Air Force member who served from 2010 to 2014. Records confirm Kelley previously served in logistics readiness in New Mexico until his discharge in 2014, Air Force spokesperson Ann Stefanek said in a statement.
Kelley was court-martialed in 2012 for two counts of assault on his spouse and assault on their child, Stefanek said. He received a bad conduct discharge and confinement for 12 months."
That guy could not legally own or posess ANY firearm under current US law. He was dishonorably dicharged (felony) and convicted of an act of domesric violence.
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government. I have been a commissioned law enforcement officer and have seen many gun possessors who should have been prevented from having one.
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government. I have been a commissioned law enforcement officer and have seen many gun possessors who should have been prevented from having one.
It is time to stop this BS that is is us verses them. It is all of us together, and as citizens we need to say who can legitably have guns and who shouldn’t.
You like to write me off as a liberal. I have been a life member of the NRA since 1966. I am a a qualified Master shooter in High Power competition, Sharpshooter in pistol competition and I also shoot skeet and sporting clays. I own two farms and have private rifle and pistol ranges set up on my land. I belong to two shooting clubs. I have three kids who hunt deer and I hunt deer, elk and upland birds every year.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either. The shooter in Texas and the one in Las Vegas are cases in point. Don’t tell me that deeper screening wouldn’t have brought up questions on these two shooters. No, it wouldn’t have stopped all, but it would stop some.
The Constitution and my God given rights to protect my family and myself trump your resume and opinions (neither of which mean chit to me).
Sure sounds like it. And the witness doesn't say that he shot at the BG, he says he shot him, and then fired again trying to hit him through his vehicle window. Waiting for more info....
Sure sounds like it. And the witness doesn't say that he shot at the BG, he says he shot him, and then fired again trying to hit him through his vehicle window. Waiting for more info....
The chase down guys indicate rifle I think... On the link RNF provided.
"I pulled up to the intersection where the shooting happened and I saw two men exchanging gunfire," Langendorff said, noting the shooter and another local were shooting at each other. Once the gunman fled the church grounds in his vehicle, Langendorff said the other man came to his car. "The other gentleman said we needed to pursue (the shooter) because he shot up the church," he said. "So that's what I did. I just acted." The pair chased the man down FM 539 headed North before the shooter lost control and ran off the roadway. Langendorff said the other man with him jumped out of the car and drew his rifle on Kelley. "He didn't move after that," Langendorff said.
No weapon detail though... I am thinking rifle though.
Agreed. Glad he was there to put a stop to it. What a horrible thing.
Yep. Thank God for the Good Samaritans! Since the Perp was dressed in black with a black face mask, he may have had other targets planned out. If he hadn't covered his face, my theory would be that he either planned to kill himself or wanted to die by suicide by cop.
Sure sounds like it. And the witness doesn't say that he shot at the BG, he says he shot him, and then fired again trying to hit him through his vehicle window. Waiting for more info....
The chase down guys indicate rifle I think... On the link RNF provided.
"I pulled up to the intersection where the shooting happened and I saw two men exchanging gunfire," Langendorff said, noting the shooter and another local were shooting at each other. Once the gunman fled the church grounds in his vehicle, Langendorff said the other man came to his car. "The other gentleman said we needed to pursue (the shooter) because he shot up the church," he said. "So that's what I did. I just acted." The pair chased the man down FM 539 headed North before the shooter lost control and ran off the roadway. Langendorff said the other man with him jumped out of the car and drew his rifle on Kelley. "He didn't move after that," Langendorff said.
So, a good guy with a gun stopped this. We need more good guys with guns. (GGWG's)
I am heartsick hearing of this. What could possess somebody to do something such as this? I can't believe our country has spawned such evil. God help those who lost loved ones.
Saw this earlier and feeling very much the same. A sad day for America..
New York Post says the neighbor used a rifle. They may have info or may be assuming.
Edited to add: Dept of Public Safety Regional Director said the good guy used a rifle. I expect he would get that right.
I heard/read in the last hour that the good guy and the perp used "same type of gun and same type of ammo" so it was unclear if perp shot himself, or died of wounds from good guy.
We live in an evil world where Evil picks the time and place of it's choosing to do harm. The best thing we can do is to be armed and ready to confront Evil wherever we may be, laws be damned.
Originally Posted by jaguartx
Methodist Church is a part of the World Council of Churches ( along with the Catholic Church) which is against the 2A.
It would seem that nearly all of Christendom belongs to the WCC. I find it disappointing that even my diocese is a member. There are a couple I'm aware of that are conspicuously absent that I may have to consider for future membership although travel would be a bit inconvenient.
My mother's family settled in middle Tennessee in the early 1800's on a land grant. Hostile Indians were a constant danger in the early years. After things had settled down, but still 25 years before the Civil War, they had enough neighbors in the area to start a community church. The family donated the land for the church and provided labor and materials and soon a nice church was in full operation, and well attended.
Many of the old church records are still in the possession of our family. These records detail many of the activities of the church and the congregation during those times. There was a routine to every Sunday. Many families traveled an hour or more to attend the services. After the morning service ended the women served a pot-luck dinner to all present. Then while the women cleaned up and visited, and the young children played, weather permitting, the men all assembled behind the church and trained and practiced with their muzzle loading rifles. They finished the session with a shooting competition of one sort or another.
A popular competition was the live turkey shoot, where a live turkey was tethered behind a log so that only its head was visible. The shooter that managed to kill the turkey with his shot got to take the bird home that day.
The men were organized with some sort of rank structure and trained in military subjects with the goal of being able to protect their community if such need should arise. In the sense that they were trained and practiced, and ready to serve if needed, these church men truly were the very essence of the "well regulated militia" that the founding fathers spoke of.
In those times every man brought his rifle to Sunday services. And they got in some practice almost every week.
That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
No it's not. You are either an idiot or a liar. The word "regulated" as used in the 18th Century meant to be well practiced, and proficient. It had/has nothing to with govt meddling as the word 'regulation' is used today.
Your creds don't mean schitt to me other than you're an admitted enemy attempting to infiltrate or remain within our ranks. I'm LE and former military. The oaths I took mean something. There is not a sliding scale as to what degree you uphold the oath. You've already admitted you're an elitist fahq. You are a disgrace to your badge and a traitor to our values.
In every other instance where the term "regulate" is used, or regulations are referred to, the Constitution specifies who is to do the regulating and what is being "regulated." However, in the Second Amendment, the Framers chose only to use the term "well regulated" to describe a militia and chose not to define who or what would regulate it.
We were at a church meeting last night. In the last few minutes it was question and answer time. One question was from gentleman, he was inquiring if we had a "security team" or security. I believe last week he would not have asked. Times have changed, overnight.
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government. I have been a commissioned law enforcement officer and have seen many gun possessors who should have been prevented from having one.
It is time to stop this BS that is is us verses them. It is all of us together, and as citizens we need to say who can legitably have guns and who shouldn’t.
You like to write me off as a liberal. I have been a life member of the NRA since 1966. I am a a qualified Master shooter in High Power competition, Sharpshooter in pistol competition and I also shoot skeet and sporting clays. I own two farms and have private rifle and pistol ranges set up on my land. I belong to two shooting clubs. I have three kids who hunt deer and I hunt deer, elk and upland birds every year.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either. The shooter in Texas and the one in Las Vegas are cases in point. Don’t tell me that deeper screening wouldn’t have brought up questions on these two shooters. No, it wouldn’t have stopped all, but it would stop some.
That BS about the Militia part of the Second Amendment reveals you’re a liberal. It’s a liberal shibboleth.
The fact is that the statement about well regulated militias being necessary laid out the reason for what followed ... it didn’t provide a condition for what followed, and what followed was a guarantee that the people’s right (not the militia’s right) to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
One thing is becoming very clear in the incident...
The guy that armed himself and shot the bad guy is truly a hero in every sense of the word. He prevented the shooter from killing more people. Perhaps MANY more, because there was another church in Sutherland Springs just down the road from the Baptist church he attacked.
The bad guy had an arsenal in his vehicle. We may never know, but I think the rampage would have continued, had he not been stopped when he was.
The fact that a good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with one just proves we need Constitutional Carry anywhere and everywhere on U.S. soil.
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government. I have been a commissioned law enforcement officer and have seen many gun possessors who should have been prevented from having one.
It is time to stop this BS that is is us verses them. It is all of us together, and as citizens we need to say who can legitably have guns and who shouldn’t.
You like to write me off as a liberal. I have been a life member of the NRA since 1966. I am a a qualified Master shooter in High Power competition, Sharpshooter in pistol competition and I also shoot skeet and sporting clays. I own two farms and have private rifle and pistol ranges set up on my land. I belong to two shooting clubs. I have three kids who hunt deer and I hunt deer, elk and upland birds every year.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either. The shooter in Texas and the one in Las Vegas are cases in point. Don’t tell me that deeper screening wouldn’t have brought up questions on these two shooters. No, it wouldn’t have stopped all, but it would stop some.
The second makes no reference to qualification. It does imply you should HAVE a firearm. Well regulated, refers to well equipped. I understand, given your background, why you interpret the amendment as you do. The clearly written amendment itself, does not require what you want. You sound reasonable enough, but the "slippery slope" is started with seemingly reasonable ideas.
One thing is becoming very clear in the incident...
The guy that armed himself and shot the bad guy is truly a hero in every sense of the word. He prevented the shooter from killing more people. Perhaps MANY more, because there was another church in Sutherland Springs just down the road from the Baptist church he attacked.
The bad guy had an arsenal in his vehicle. We may never know, but I think the rampage would have continued, had he not been stopped when he was.
The fact that a good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with one just proves we need Constitutional Carry anywhere and everywhere on U.S. soil.
You're not just a woofin'. I very seldom get out of Missouri, Kansas and Oklahoma. Occasionally I will go to Texas and see relatives and even more occasionally venture into Arkansas or Louisiana. Other than these areas, it doesn't impact me much. I'd sure like to see Constitutional Carry from Kansas to Texas with all three states recognizing it for residents of other states. It could be the start of a new country if things get tight enough. Its been spoken of before. Add Missouri and I'm golden. Add the other two states and it's gravy.
Constitutional Carry is so good it's unreal. The only thing better is if people would wise up and FORCE the government to obey it's own laws and just actually recognize the 2nd Amendment, meaning we wouldn't have to pass laws for Constitutional Carry as we'd just simply be able to do it.
I used to be a regular church-goer and I admit to never having carried in Church-that I recall. I've just never felt the need. I live in BF southeast Kansas and the town where the Church is is about 600 souls strong, I'd guess. This has gotten me to thinking that this could happen anywhere, anytime and makes me a lot more worried about my kids at school-though we have some safeguards in place.
That being Texas, I'm really convinced that if we ever find out, it will be revealed that several of the 27 vics were carrying but for whatever reason just couldn't bring their weapons into play. If that's the case it just shows the need for training. I don't mean mandatory bs CCW stuff, I mean real advanced training and mindset.
People like us have no safe space. I wouldn't have it any other way though...
One thing is becoming very clear in the incident...
The guy that armed himself and shot the bad guy is truly a hero in every sense of the word. He prevented the shooter from killing more people. Perhaps MANY more, because there was another church in Sutherland Springs just down the road from the Baptist church he attacked.
The bad guy had an arsenal in his vehicle. We may never know, but I think the rampage would have continued, had he not been stopped when he was.
The fact that a good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with one just proves we need Constitutional Carry anywhere and everywhere on U.S. soil.
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
"K-Y Windage" sounds like some really greasy [bleep]'s fart.
One thing is becoming very clear in the incident...
The guy that armed himself and shot the bad guy is truly a hero in every sense of the word. He prevented the shooter from killing more people. Perhaps MANY more, because there was another church in Sutherland Springs just down the road from the Baptist church he attacked.
The bad guy had an arsenal in his vehicle. We may never know, but I think the rampage would have continued, had he not been stopped when he was.
The fact that a good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with one just proves we need Constitutional Carry anywhere and everywhere on U.S. soil.
We can all give our opinions, and knock other posters for giving theirs, but one thing is for certain.......if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it. It won't do any good, it won't stop the bad guys from killing, it will only make those who support it "feel good."
There are people who don't need access whatsoever to a firearm, but the problem is in determining who they are, and how to go about keeping them from getting one. For the most part, the laws on the books don't work because the judicial system either fails to act properly, or else the person obtains a gun illegally.
I'll give you an example......there is a law on the books that says a convicted felon cannot be in the possession of a firearm. My neighbor has a druggie son, a convicted felon. He gets caught with a house full of guns, gets arrested, then his daddy's boss who has political connections intervenes, charges are "amended", kid is back out on the street. He hunts deer on his daddy's property, because I've seen him, and nothing is ever done, even though according to the judicial system, he should be locked up for breaking the law.
Things such as that happen everyday across this country. I believe in enforcing the laws on the book, and believe that if we did, we could stop some of the violence from happening. Instead, we let people out of jail who need to be locked up forever, and once out, they continue to do what they doing that caused them to get in trouble in the first place. We will never completely stop people from committing violent acts, because they are going to do so regardless of the weapon used, or the reason they do it. But, I think we can potentially keep some acts from happening by enforcing the laws on the books, and making certain that a person who needs to be in jail, stays in jail.
People killing one another has gone on since Abel and Cain, and will happen as long as there are people on this earth. Cain didn't use a gun to commit that murder, so to blame guns as the reason is useless. Lizzie Borden didn't use a gun, neither did that Pakistani woman who recently murdered 17 of her relatives by poisoning them. Guns are merely a tool, but because they are a very efficient tool, they come under more intense scrutiny than would an axe or a club. Guns aren't the problem, people are, and therefore the answer lies in people control, not gun control.........something that's easier said than done.
...if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it.
Horse [bleep]. Not if we stand fast and if it happens there IS something we can do about it. Read your Constitution and don't puss out.
We can all give our opinions, and knock other posters for giving theirs, but one thing is for certain.......if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it. It won't do any good, it won't stop the bad guys from killing, it will only make those who support it "feel good."
There are people who don't need access whatsoever to a firearm, but the problem is in determining who they are, and how to go about keeping them from getting one. For the most part, the laws on the books don't work because the judicial system either fails to act properly, or else the person obtains a gun illegally.
I'll give you an example......there is a law on the books that says a convicted felon cannot be in the possession of a firearm. My neighbor has a druggie son, a convicted felon. He gets caught with a house full of guns, gets arrested, then his daddy's boss who has political connections intervenes, charges are "amended", kid is back out on the street. He hunts deer on his daddy's property, because I've seen him, and nothing is ever done, even though according to the judicial system, he should be locked up for breaking the law.
Things such as that happen everyday across this country. I believe in enforcing the laws on the book, and believe that if we did, we could stop some of the violence from happening. Instead, we let people out of jail who need to be locked up forever, and once out, they continue to do what they doing that caused them to get in trouble in the first place. We will never completely stop people from committing violent acts, because they are going to do so regardless of the weapon used, or the reason they do it. But, I think we can potentially keep some acts from happening by enforcing the laws on the books, and making certain that a person who needs to be in jail, stays in jail.
People killing one another has gone on since Abel and Cain, and will happen as long as there are people on this earth. Cain didn't use a gun to commit that murder, so to blame guns as the reason is useless. Lizzie Borden didn't use a gun, neither did that Pakistani woman who recently murdered 17 of her relatives by poisoning them. Guns are merely a tool, but because they are a very efficient tool, they come under more intense scrutiny than would an axe or a club. Guns aren't the problem, people are, and therefore the answer lies in people control, not gun control.........something that's easier said than done.
I agree with all that, James.
Well said!
Sadly, in the political climate we now live in, the headlines are "26 Killed by Gun" and not "Countless Saved by Good Guy With Firearm".
Kelly was court-martialed in 2012 for two counts of Article 128 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, assault on his spouse and assault on their child, Stefanek said. Kelley received a bad conduct discharge, confinement for 12 months and a reduction in rank, she said. The Air Force did not provide a date of the discharge.
Quote
Kelley purchased the Ruger AR-556 rifle in April 2016 from an Academy Sports & Outdoors store in San Antonio, a law enforcement official told CNN. When Kelley filled out the background check paperwork at the store, he checked the box to indicate he didn't have disqualifying criminal history, the official said. He listed an address in Colorado Springs, Colorado when he bought the rifle, the official said.
...if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it.
Horse [bleep]. Not if we stand fast and if it happens there IS something we can do about it. Read your Constitution and don't puss out.
Sooner or later, the dimmies will gain congress and the Whitehouse.
They will pass more gun legislation. They always have.
We are gonna fight them. We always do.
Liberal states are passing gun legislation with each session of their local congresses.
The best we can do is move away to states that hold to the 2nd Amendment, if you live in one that doesn't.
We can all give our opinions, and knock other posters for giving theirs, but one thing is for certain.......if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it. It won't do any good, it won't stop the bad guys from killing, it will only make those who support it "feel good."
There are people who don't need access whatsoever to a firearm, but the problem is in determining who they are, and how to go about keeping them from getting one. For the most part, the laws on the books don't work because the judicial system either fails to act properly, or else the person obtains a gun illegally.
I'll give you an example......there is a law on the books that says a convicted felon cannot be in the possession of a firearm. My neighbor has a druggie son, a convicted felon. He gets caught with a house full of guns, gets arrested, then his daddy's boss who has political connections intervenes, charges are "amended", kid is back out on the street. He hunts deer on his daddy's property, because I've seen him, and nothing is ever done, even though according to the judicial system, he should be locked up for breaking the law.
Things such as that happen everyday across this country. I believe in enforcing the laws on the book, and believe that if we did, we could stop some of the violence from happening. Instead, we let people out of jail who need to be locked up forever, and once out, they continue to do what they doing that caused them to get in trouble in the first place. We will never completely stop people from committing violent acts, because they are going to do so regardless of the weapon used, or the reason they do it. But, I think we can potentially keep some acts from happening by enforcing the laws on the books, and making certain that a person who needs to be in jail, stays in jail.
People killing one another has gone on since Abel and Cain, and will happen as long as there are people on this earth. Cain didn't use a gun to commit that murder, so to blame guns as the reason is useless. Lizzie Borden didn't use a gun, neither did that Pakistani woman who recently murdered 17 of her relatives by poisoning them. Guns are merely a tool, but because they are a very efficient tool, they come under more intense scrutiny than would an axe or a club. Guns aren't the problem, people are, and therefore the answer lies in people control, not gun control.........something that's easier said than done.
I agree with all that, James.
Well said!
Sadly, in the political climate we now live in, the headlines are "26 Killed by Gun" and not "Countless Saved by Good Guy With Firearm".
I also agree with JamesJr. amd rockinbbar.
The problem isn't the anti-gun person as you are never going to change their minds. It is the non-gun person that is ambivalent about firearms. When they stop "feeling safe" while at church, a concert, or wherever, you will see gun control and I doubt it will be pretty.
I wouldn't concede so quickly. There are reasonable persons across the country, including in urban areas, that recognize the police cannot protect one from violence. They are first responders, not first defenders. As such, an armed populace is literally the only safer solution. Many, many people recognize that, especially in the two younger generations that have come to understand that the media is agenda-ized nearly all the time.
Older generations were taught to trust govt and media as we all worked together to build a great nation. Younger generations realize that such a vision is always undermined by the political class with the mainstream media being co-opted into propagandizing. I would not in any way take a Leftnik assumption that gun control will be passed. Actually, I encounter young people everyday who realize that they need to defend themselves because the govt apparatus won't do it for them.
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either. The shooter in Texas and the one in Las Vegas are cases in point. Don’t tell me that deeper screening wouldn’t have brought up questions on these two shooters. No, it wouldn’t have stopped all, but it would stop some.
Two points:
You may think rightly or wrongly that "you are the government" now but it may not always be that way and it certainly may not be that way for your kids. Those "black and brown guys" you are talking about, by and large but not all, have communistic tendencies and may one day decide they would like to have those two farms of yours when and if they attain political majorities. Did you notice that a communist almost won the nomination for the presidency of the democratic party and it is coming to light now that he would have won it had he not been cheated? Remember the saying "democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner". If you think it can't happen here you are woefully ignorant of human history, the bulk of which has been spent under the heel of tyranny. What we have and take for granted in America is not the norm. Without the 2nd Amendment, liberty in this country has no chance.....ZERO!
I'm an elitist too. I think that there should be some kind of "screening process" to pass in order to vote besides fogging a mirror. But it ain't gonna happen. What makes me think you might be a bull crapper about LEO experience is that if that were true, you should know better than anyone that laws are for the sane. What is the worst sanction the law can apply to a miscreant? Death correct? If a person reaches the point for whatever reason that he is ready and willing to die in order to commit a crime, the law loses all sanctioning ability and is therefore meaningless. The current killer was dishonorably discharged from the military and as I understand it such a person is not allowed to buy or own firearms just like a convicted felon. Other mass killers have passed background checks because they never had so much as a traffic ticket on their record. As a former LEO you should know that mental health like physical health is fluid.
So perhaps we should ask why an individual with a dishonorable discharge from the Military should be allowed to purchase a Modern Sporting Rifle? Perhaps we need a little more screening of folks?
IT wasn't a dishonorable. It was a Bad Conduct Discharge. big difference
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government. I have been a commissioned law enforcement officer and have seen many gun possessors who should have been prevented from having one.
It is time to stop this BS that is is us verses them. It is all of us together, and as citizens we need to say who can legitably have guns and who shouldn’t.
You like to write me off as a liberal. I have been a life member of the NRA since 1966. I am a a qualified Master shooter in High Power competition, Sharpshooter in pistol competition and I also shoot skeet and sporting clays. I own two farms and have private rifle and pistol ranges set up on my land. I belong to two shooting clubs. I have three kids who hunt deer and I hunt deer, elk and upland birds every year.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either. The shooter in Texas and the one in Las Vegas are cases in point. Don’t tell me that deeper screening wouldn’t have brought up questions on these two shooters. No, it wouldn’t have stopped all, but it would stop some.
You're the enemy of liberty and freedom, maybe because you don't understand it in your foolish myoptic view of self. You are not who many men fought and died for. GFY azzhole.
It was a BCD. Of course, since it was a DV charge he still should have been prohibited by the Lautenberg Amendment. But then again, there is no specific DV statute in the UCMJ, so it is entirely dependent on how the military reports it.
This is a loophole that could be fixed by one simple general order or directive that all discharges that are related to a DV incident are to be reported. A lot of times even guys who could be court martialed get a Chapter 10 (discharge in lieu of court martial) and a general discharge. And a general discharge can cover anything from someone who was injured or a hopeless frick up during Basic and cut loose pretty quick, to in the case of a Chapter 10, guys who may have done something fairly serious. In the Army, good order and discipline instead of punishment is the goal of the UCMJ. So if it is easier to cut someone loose, they’ll do it rather than waste resources.
The Lautenberg applies under the UCMJ. All members who carry have to sign a document (called a Page 13 in the Navy) acknowledging and if they have a conflict, they cannot arm up. It's a stupid law.
"Kelley is a former U.S. Air Force member who served from 2010 to 2014. Records confirm Kelley previously served in logistics readiness in New Mexico until his discharge in 2014, Air Force spokesperson Ann Stefanek said in a statement.
Kelley was court-martialed in 2012 for two counts of assault on his spouse and assault on their child, Stefanek said. He received a bad conduct discharge and confinement for 12 months."
That guy could not legally own or posess ANY firearm under current US law. He was dishonorably dicharged (felony) and convicted of an act of domesric violence.
Question is HOW did he get that gun ?
You answered your own question. BCD is not a DD. There is very little uniformity on how the military reports such sheit.
Laws do only affect the lawful. The criminal's only use for the law is to be able to use it to his advantage. Gun free zones are the safest place for a person bent on murdering his fellow citizens. That's what we are seeing today. The more strict gun control laws become the more the danger to society. You cannot legislate everything. That is government's great failing. The government's argument for taxing more in order to make us safer should be painfully clear by now. Law enforcement is a noble occupation and a dangerous one but it cannot prevent crimes it can only react to them.
We are coming off eight long years of a racially conflicted president that dedicated his tenure to denying his genetic makeup and destroying the culture that allowed his rise to power. He squandered the greatest opportunity to unite us and instead drove us farther apart defining us as sub groups struggling against one another. Living a lie has become commonplace and the order of the day. Whatever values you ascribe to precision shooting should be high among them as it is becoming evident that we do live in a dangerous world and those well meaning buffoons that rule us cannot and will not make it safer to exist.
Slaves are kept in control by first taking control of their minds. And the masters tell them it's "education". As long as someone thinks as a slave, they will be a slave. That is why the communists have taken control of nearly all schools in the USA and that has been their top agenda since the 20s. Studies of true history is eliminated or twisted. This is done because as soon as people start to think as free citizens they will become free citizens.
Slaves are granted what the master think they need, and only when that slave asks, begs and pay for the "privilege". A privilege is the opposite of a right. Rights self-exist. Privilege is something granted by a master, and that privilege is ALWAYS the jurisdiction of a master. Even after the privilege is granted, it is still the jurisdiction of the master and can be revoked at any time for any reason, or for no reason.
Free men do as they wish as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of another free man.
OK guys, answer me this. If its a BCD on the assault charges against his wife and kid, doesn't that count as domestic violence? If so, he couldn't legally obtain a firearm...
If there is some legal technicality between the military and civilian courts, then we just plain aren't hard enough on our criminals ( big news flash there!) anyway, I asking, because I truly don't know. Educate me.
OK guys, answer me this. If its a BCD on the assault charges against his wife and kid, doesn't that count as domestic violence? If so, he couldn't legally obtain a firearm...
I think in lots of those cases, the firearms ban is not permanent. I'm talking civilians.
OK guys, answer me this. If its a BCD on the assault charges against his wife and kid, doesn't that count as domestic violence? If so, he couldn't legally obtain a firearm...
If there is some legal technicality between the military and civilian courts, then we just plain aren't hard enough on our criminals ( big news flash there!) anyway, I asking, because I truly don't know. Educate me.
'Gwe: The only place where this could have possibly shown up is on a background check IF he purchased the firearm through a dealer and or if he annotated it (which I doubt) on the 4473. A BCD will show up on a NAC (National agency Check). A BCD allows you to purchase weapons BUT a DV charge proscribes it under Lautenberg like JoeBob noted.
I am a citizen of the United States as most of you are. I am not afraid of the Government because I am the Government. I have been a commissioned law enforcement officer and have seen many gun possessors who should have been prevented from having one.
It is time to stop this BS that is is us verses them. It is all of us together, and as citizens we need to say who can legitably have guns and who shouldn’t.
You like to write me off as a liberal. I have been a life member of the NRA since 1966. I am a a qualified Master shooter in High Power competition, Sharpshooter in pistol competition and I also shoot skeet and sporting clays. I own two farms and have private rifle and pistol ranges set up on my land. I belong to two shooting clubs. I have three kids who hunt deer and I hunt deer, elk and upland birds every year.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I am an elitist. There are a bunch of black and brown guys who should not have guns, but there are a bunch of white guys who shouldn’t have them either. The shooter in Texas and the one in Las Vegas are cases in point. Don’t tell me that deeper screening wouldn’t have brought up questions on these two shooters. No, it wouldn’t have stopped all, but it would stop some.
I rankle at people like you and your ilk who get into legislatures, senates, councils, and other bodies, who presume with moral indignation and ignorance of the cornerstone problem pass idiotic rules for others to live by while chipping away at the very green tree of freedom with the axe of laws that diminish all us. And speaking of government, that morass of corruption, immorality, and ineptitude -- I should trust them to do the right and just thing for the citizens of this nation? Hardly on its best day.
OK guys, answer me this. If its a BCD on the assault charges against his wife and kid, doesn't that count as domestic violence? If so, he couldn't legally obtain a firearm...
If there is some legal technicality between the military and civilian courts, then we just plain aren't hard enough on our criminals ( big news flash there!) anyway, I asking, because I truly don't know. Educate me.
'Gwe: The only place where this could have possibly shown up is on a background check IF he purchased the firearm through a dealer and or if he annotated it (which I doubt) on the 4473. A BCD will show up on a NAC (National agency Check). A BCD allows you to purchase weapons BUT a DV charge proscribes it under Lautenberg like JoeBob noted.
And to go further, one's BCD can be on a crime that was a felony, which will prohibit. That said, GENERALLY speaking, when you read Bad Conduct Discharge, think Misdemeanor
When you read Dishonorable Discharge, read Felony.
Is a 'Bad conduct discharge' considered "other than Honorable condtions"?
That's the language on the 4473.
Of course it is. But as explained before hand, a BCD is often-times NOT a felony. If it was it would have shown up on a NAC check. Or, the perp bought the gun via a private sale.
OK guys, answer me this. If its a BCD on the assault charges against his wife and kid, doesn't that count as domestic violence? If so, he couldn't legally obtain a firearm...
If there is some legal technicality between the military and civilian courts, then we just plain aren't hard enough on our criminals ( big news flash there!) anyway, I asking, because I truly don't know. Educate me.
'Gwe: The only place where this could have possibly shown up is on a background check IF he purchased the firearm through a dealer and or if he annotated it (which I doubt) on the 4473. A BCD will show up on a NAC (National agency Check). A BCD allows you to purchase weapons BUT a DV charge proscribes it under Lautenberg like JoeBob noted.
And to go further, one's BCD can be on a crime that was a felony, which will prohibit. That said, GENERALLY speaking, when you read Bad Conduct Discharge, think Misdemeanor
When you read Dishonorable Discharge, read Felony.
Thanks guys. Domestic violence is often classed as a misdemeanor, but its the ONLY one that prohibits a purchase or legal ownership of a firearm or ammo.
James, it’s not possible to keep guns out of the hands of determined murderers in a nation where most enjoy said right. That’s a pipe dream. You can only even make a tiny inroad into doing it by adopting English style controls, and even those would only work on a small island type nation. The only way to address this problem while retaining our cherished liberties is to go the other direction, ie, adopt laws that encourage the good people in our society to carry serious arms and to train regularly with them, which means in part the utter elimination of so called gun free zones.
Under Dishonorable Conditions That said it also asks about Misdemeanor Domestic Violence and if Felony Conviction (which may or may not have been his case).
There are also conditions to all of that and I am depending on the PRESS to be giving me the CORRECT info and they know less about they military than they do about guns.
So in short, I'm sure whatever the conditions (discharge,4473, Texas etc) will fit their narrative.
The way I look at it, and the media does it best to sweep the obvious under the rug, like so much dirt...
We as a nation are at war...we have enemies, both foreign and domestic, right within our borders who exist with a goal to disassemble this nation as we know it...
it is not a declared war.. so people ignore the fact...
yet people are getting killed in our communities en mass, and it is quickly becoming an every day occurrence.... what happens daily in the Middle East is happening in our nation now.
Disarm the public with more and more gun laws, just makes the entire public more and more venerable.
These people who do these mass killings, always hit a soft target, but a target rich environment... disarm the public, or let yourself be disarmed, you just provide our enemies with more soft targets.
its not killing that is their ultimate goal, its destroying our nation from within that is their goal. mass killing helps them do so as we give away our rights to defend ourselves, hoping it makes each of us and our families safer..... look how that is working out...
And clowns like this Kelly idiot, are ALWAYS going to be able to secure a firearm or their choice.. the most dangerous cities in our country are the ones with the most gun control.... the criminals who want a firearm to kill, can always find someone who has them to sell.... NO Back ground check, NO Reason not to sell it, AS LONG AS SOMEONE HAS THE MONEY, they can purchase it.
The media and liberals continue to try at every hand, to convince us to give away our abilities to defend ourselves.. they never miss a chance... its right out of the communist play book.
when we give into that, they don't 'kill' our nation.. our nation commits suicide...
do you want to die on your knees... or watch your family slaughtered like sheep?
if not, then stand up and defend them, don't give up the tools to do so...
and stop listening to the rhetoric of the liberal left, and the Lame Street Media... they aren't your friend... and neither are the DemocRATS....
I would vote him most likely to be involved in a mass shooting.
He does have a certain "look." What gets me is people adopt a "look" in order to send a message, whether they know it or not, yet they expect to be treated normally. For example, consider a BLM type that adopts the mannerisms and dress of a hood thug yet who protests "profiling" when people cross the street when they see him coming.
I am afraid of any government that prefers tyranny over the rule of law as we have seen our country prefer with respect to 2 sets of enforcement, open borders, collusion by the cia, fbi and irs against private citizens, illegal immigration, and the neutering of the 2A.
Is a 'Bad conduct discharge' considered "other than Honorable condtions"?
That's the language on the 4473.
Of course it is. But as explained before hand, a BCD is often-times NOT a felony. If it was it would have shown up on a NAC check. Or, the perp bought the gun via a private sale.
That's what I thought, too, but I wonder how the BATFE defines it. I could see where some ffl seller says , "well, it's not a Dishonorable Discharge and it must be okay to sell it since the phone call said so". Just wondering.
OK guys, answer me this. If its a BCD on the assault charges against his wife and kid, doesn't that count as domestic violence? If so, he couldn't legally obtain a firearm...
If there is some legal technicality between the military and civilian courts, then we just plain aren't hard enough on our criminals ( big news flash there!) anyway, I asking, because I truly don't know. Educate me.
'Gwe: The only place where this could have possibly shown up is on a background check IF he purchased the firearm through a dealer and or if he annotated it (which I doubt) on the 4473. A BCD will show up on a NAC (National agency Check). A BCD allows you to purchase weapons BUT a DV charge proscribes it under Lautenberg like JoeBob noted.
And to go further, one's BCD can be on a crime that was a felony, which will prohibit. That said, GENERALLY speaking, when you read Bad Conduct Discharge, think Misdemeanor
When you read Dishonorable Discharge, read Felony.
Thanks guys. Domestic violence is often classed as a misdemeanor, but its the ONLY one that prohibits a purchase or legal ownership of a firearm or ammo.
Agreed and understood. That said, I don't actually know WHAT was on his paperwork the day he walked out of the military. I'm thinking if he DID purchase a firearm that 1) he lied and 2) the Domestic Violence, it that was the case, did NOT get reported from military to civilian.
When did he buy the gun? Did he buy the gun? Was it before is BCD? I only know what I'm reading in the press, which really means little
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
IMHO, you're a pizz-poor law officer - since you obviously do NOT believe in the US Constitution.. Ergo, eff you-O...
Quote
The Constitution and my God given rights to protect my family and myself trump your resume and opinions (neither of which mean chit to me).
Gov. Abbott stated that Texas DPS rejected this guy's application for a CCW.
GOOD for him!
I know its a CYA move by authority, but it also may quell some of the MSM rants.
Well, if that didnt work we must outlaw guns to do anything to save our citizens, except stop the massive influx of moslems into this country due to PC.
The only way to address this problem while retaining our cherished liberties is to go the other direction, ie, adopt laws that encourage the good people in our society to carry serious arms and to train regularly with them, which means in part the utter elimination of so called gun free zones.
That's what I've been saying for a long time.
Also, government is not necessarily capable to objectively determine who cannot possess firearms. DV for example does not have to be "violence" as normal people would define it. I fact most DV charges do not stem from a explicit threat or actual physical violence. Simply spitting on the ground in front of a ex girlfriend--and she complains--can result in DV charges. Plus DV is a misdemeanor--and a person can permanently lose rights if convicted.
Soon, any misdemeanor can result in a loss of rights if it's politically incorrect enough.
The only way to address this problem while retaining our cherished liberties is to go the other direction, ie, adopt laws that encourage the good people in our society to carry serious arms and to train regularly with them, which means in part the utter elimination of so called gun free zones.
That's what I've been saying for a long time.
Also, government is not necessarily capable to objectively determine who cannot possess firearms. DV for example does not have to be "violence" as normal people would define it. I fact most DV charges do not stem from a explicit threat or actual physical violence. Simply spitting on the ground in front of a ex girlfriend--and she complains--can result in DV charges. Plus DV is a misdemeanor--and a person can permanently lose rights if convicted.
Soon, any misdemeanor can result in a loss of rights if it's politically incorrect enough.
Yes to both. The former is ostensibly what the Texas Attorney General said last night, i.e. it should be easier if people could carry just about everywhere. To the latter, the Lautenberg is yet another poorly (by design) written law by democrats to further restrict gun ownership
Yes to both. The former is ostensibly what the Texas Attorney General said last night, i.e. it should be easier if people could carry just about everywhere. To the latter, the Lautenberg is yet another poorly (by design) written law by democrats to further restrict gun ownership
Yet the Texas legislators reject Constitutional Carry every time it comes up.
Texas finally got a partial Open Carry law last year, but you have to have a CCW to carry open...
Texas has always been slow to reform and loosen gun control laws. Maybe this will bring about a few more inches in the crawl we are in for CC.
The Great State of Texas, needs to reevaluate and change their anti-gun legislation. Far to may Gun-Free-Zones in Texas.
Aren't Churches "Gun Free Zones" by statute? Was this church posted?
Penal Code 46.035 Unlawful Carrying of Handgun By License Holder
(a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder’s person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally displays the handgun in plain view of another person in a public place. It is an exception to the application of this subsection that the handgun was partially or wholly visible but was carried in a shoulder or belt holster by the license holder.
(a-1) Notwithstanding Subsection (a), a license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a partially or wholly visible handgun, regardless of whether the handgun is holstered, on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally displays the handgun in plain view of another person:
(1) on the premises of an institution of higher education or private or independent institution of higher education; or (2) on any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area of an institution of higher education or private or independent institution of higher education. (b) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun regardless of whether the handgun is concealed or carried in a shoulder or belt holster, on or about the license holder ’s person:
(1) on the premises of a business that has a permit or license issued under Chapter 25, 28, 32, 69, or 74, Alcoholic Beverage Code, if the business derives 51 percent or more of its income from the sale or service of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption, as determined by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission under Section 104.06, Alcoholic Beverage Code;
(2) on the premises where a high school, collegiate, or professional sporting event or interscholastic event is taking place, unless the license holder is a participant in the event and a handgun is used in the event;
(3) on the premises of a correctional facility;
*(4) on the premises of a hospital licensed under Chapter 241, Health and Safety Code, or on the premises of a nursing facility licensed under Chapter 242, Health and Safety Code, unless the license holder has written authorization of the hospital or nursing facility [home] administration, as appropriate
*(5) in an amusement park; or
*(6) on the premises of a church, synagogue, or other established place of religious worship. *
(c) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed or carried in a shoulder or belt holster, at any meeting of a governmental entity
*Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06 or 30.07.
Honest question here. If you know someone possesses guns (or suspect they do) and have reason to believe they aren't qualified due to legal or mental safety issues, what do you do?
James, it’s not possible to keep guns out of the hands of determined murderers in a nation where most enjoy said right. That’s a pipe dream. You can only even make a tiny inroad into doing it by adopting English style controls, and even those would only work on a small island type nation. The only way to address this problem while retaining our cherished liberties is to go the other direction, ie, adopt laws that encourage the good people in our society to carry serious arms and to train regularly with them, which means in part the utter elimination of so called gun free zones.
You're right.......BUT, trying telling at least half the populace that. Even though we managed to elect Donald Trump, never forget that half the population voted for a candidate who would ban all guns if she could. While the majority of the states would pass laws that permitted more concealed carry, there will be those that would gladly pass laws that would restrict not only CC, but the ownership of guns as well. AND.....those states are usually the ones who's voices are heard the most.
I guess, to put it in simple terms......I do not trust our politicians to ever do the "right thing", as sooner or later, most bow to public opinion. Just look at how a few senators are holding up Trump and what he would like to do.
The Great State of Texas, needs to reevaluate and change their anti-gun legislation. Far to may Gun-Free-Zones in Texas.
Aren't Churches "Gun Free Zones" by statute? Was this church posted?
Penal Code 46.035 Unlawful Carrying of Handgun By License Holder
(a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder’s person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally displays the handgun in plain view of another person in a public place. It is an exception to the application of this subsection that the handgun was partially or wholly visible but was carried in a shoulder or belt holster by the license holder.
(a-1) Notwithstanding Subsection (a), a license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a partially or wholly visible handgun, regardless of whether the handgun is holstered, on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally displays the handgun in plain view of another person:
(1) on the premises of an institution of higher education or private or independent institution of higher education; or (2) on any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area of an institution of higher education or private or independent institution of higher education. (b) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun regardless of whether the handgun is concealed or carried in a shoulder or belt holster, on or about the license holder ’s person:
(1) on the premises of a business that has a permit or license issued under Chapter 25, 28, 32, 69, or 74, Alcoholic Beverage Code, if the business derives 51 percent or more of its income from the sale or service of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption, as determined by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission under Section 104.06, Alcoholic Beverage Code;
(2) on the premises where a high school, collegiate, or professional sporting event or interscholastic event is taking place, unless the license holder is a participant in the event and a handgun is used in the event;
(3) on the premises of a correctional facility;
*(4) on the premises of a hospital licensed under Chapter 241, Health and Safety Code, or on the premises of a nursing facility licensed under Chapter 242, Health and Safety Code, unless the license holder has written authorization of the hospital or nursing facility [home] administration, as appropriate
*(5) in an amusement park; or
*(6) on the premises of a church, synagogue, or other established place of religious worship. *
(c) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed or carried in a shoulder or belt holster, at any meeting of a governmental entity
*Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06 or 30.07.
*Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06 or 30.07.
If the church has a 30.06 or 30.07 sign posted, the CCW cannot carry there. If they don't post the premises with the required signage, than they can carry in church.
I left the city I lived in because the left took control of it. So far they haven't radicalized (in that city) but the seeds have been planted.
I didn't have to move far because Kentucky residents largely have a Nationalist mindset. But I think the time is coming when people of a Nationalist mentality are going to have to consider moving if they live in a large metropolitan area.
The Communists on the left are attempting to change the cultural makeup of this nation and if you're a traditionalist sort, they want you dead.
Some of them will act on it,..some won't. But the divide has already occurred. The left forced it.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I disagree with your reading 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."
This does not say "If you are a trained member of the organized Militia then you may keep and bear arms." Rather, the highlighted first part is stated as an example to illustrate the absolute truth of the second part. The second part stands alone in meaning.
The freshness of the orange being important to the quality of its juice, two plus two equals four. See how the truth of the second part is not diminished by the first part.
James, it’s not possible to keep guns out of the hands of determined murderers in a nation where most enjoy said right. That’s a pipe dream. You can only even make a tiny inroad into doing it by adopting English style controls, and even those would only work on a small island type nation. The only way to address this problem while retaining our cherished liberties is to go the other direction, ie, adopt laws that encourage the good people in our society to carry serious arms and to train regularly with them, which means in part the utter elimination of so called gun free zones.
You're right.......BUT, trying telling at least half the populace that. Even though we managed to elect Donald Trump, never forget that half the population voted for a candidate who would ban all guns if she could. While the majority of the states would pass laws that permitted more concealed carry, there will be those that would gladly pass laws that would restrict not only CC, but the ownership of guns as well. AND.....those states are usually the ones who's voices are heard the most.
I guess, to put it in simple terms......I do not trust our politicians to ever do the "right thing", as sooner or later, most bow to public opinion. Just look at how a few senators are holding up Trump and what he would like to do.
if i were king for a day, i'd imlement free carry for all. but, it wouldn't take long till the body count would rise, probably. and people would demand that "something be done." then, i as king would be forced to act for the good of the people.
the reality, sad as it is, the US is running against the thought patterns that occur on most of the earth's surface. well, maybe not somalia and some of the arab denominated muslim countries. but otherwise we're in the minority whether we like it or not. it'll take some creative thought to get past all of this.
I happen to believe that as citizens we should prove we are qualified to keep and bear arms. If we are not qualified we shouldn’t be allowed to have them. That’s where “well regulated militia” kicks in IMHO.
I disagree with your reading 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."
This does not say "If you are a trained member of the organized Militia then you may keep and bear arms." Rather, the highlighted first part is stated as an example to illustrate the absolute truth of the second part. The second part stands alone in meaning.
The freshness of the orange being important to the quality of its juice, two plus two equals four. See how the truth of the second part is not diminished by the first part.
Mathman is correct. We must remember the meaning of the words at the time the constitution was written. The militia was the people, the continental army was the military.
Obviously a full on mental health/evil issue. Problem is there are 10,000+ folks just like him as our culture of evil/godlessness is starting to really catch up with us. You really have to watch your back these days and be ready for these situations at any moment. I need to get better at carrying, even in my little corner of the universe. I'm sure these folks in this small town never expected this to happen. I would feel sorry for anyone who entered my home uninvited, but I'll admit my family would be a sitting duck in church.
As an aside, in my uneducated opinion, one of the best ways to stop a shooter in body armor would be an experienced hunter with a hunting rifle and a scope.
Fortunately we have Trump in office, who is obviously on our side.
I wouldn't concede so quickly. There are reasonable persons across the country, including in urban areas, that recognize the police cannot protect one from violence. They are first responders, not first defenders. As such, an armed populace is literally the only safer solution. Many, many people recognize that, especially in the two younger generations that have come to understand that the media is agenda-ized nearly all the time.
Older generations were taught to trust govt and media as we all worked together to build a great nation. Younger generations realize that such a vision is always undermined by the political class with the mainstream media being co-opted into propagandizing. I would not in any way take a Leftnik assumption that gun control will be passed. Actually, I encounter young people everyday who realize that they need to defend themselves because the govt apparatus won't do it for them.
I think a heck of a lot more people are carrying these days than many realize. Every major firearm manufacturer out there is scaling down the size of their handguns or creating new, small designs. They're doing that because that's what sells. They sell because people feel the need to be armed without advertising it.
I own a few handguns, mostly revolvers, just because I like the workmanship displayed in them, I like loading for them and seeing how they perform. Actually, I mostly like just holding them in my hand and looking at them. They're nice examples of American metalworking.
But the handgun that I'm rarely without is a first generation Ruger LCP that's been fitted with a Hogue slip on grip. It has no aesthetic appeal to me at all, but It disappears in the front pocket of a loose fitting pair of Carhartt Carpenter's jeans.
I just heard President Trump say " good thing someone had a gun to shoot back or it would have been worse." That may not be word for word but the meaning was the same. Leadership matters.
Whether this guy could have had a gun legally or not is meaningless, if he was not, that law only will hurt the law abiding.
CC should be like the American Express commercial " don't leave home without it."
Is a 'Bad conduct discharge' considered "other than Honorable condtions"?
That's the language on the 4473.
Of course it is. But as explained before hand, a BCD is often-times NOT a felony. If it was it would have shown up on a NAC check. Or, the perp bought the gun via a private sale.
Thanks. I was just trying to sort that out. And, as Steelhead said, whether it would get reported or not was a question.
He bought the gun at Academy, so he definitely passed the background check. He WAS legally prohibited from owning a gun. The thing is, unlike the civilian world, the miltary has no specific DV statute. He would have been prosecuted under some other article for assault or something like that. At that point, the people doing the background checks are not automatically made aware of the circumstances because it isn’t spelled out in the charge and therefore, the only way they would have known was if the Air Force notified the correct agencies of the reason for the discharge. I doubt they have a program or the manpower for that. It is a fairly simple fix. Probably the easiest thing to do is to add a family violence article to the UCMJ or a specific chapter of discharge for that offense.
In the civilian world any DV charge will be called family violence or something like that and it automatically shows up in the system.
OK guys, answer me this. If its a BCD on the assault charges against his wife and kid, doesn't that count as domestic violence? If so, he couldn't legally obtain a firearm...
If there is some legal technicality between the military and civilian courts, then we just plain aren't hard enough on our criminals ( big news flash there!) anyway, I asking, because I truly don't know. Educate me.
'Gwe: The only place where this could have possibly shown up is on a background check IF he purchased the firearm through a dealer and or if he annotated it (which I doubt) on the 4473. A BCD will show up on a NAC (National agency Check). A BCD allows you to purchase weapons BUT a DV charge proscribes it under Lautenberg like JoeBob noted.
And to go further, one's BCD can be on a crime that was a felony, which will prohibit. That said, GENERALLY speaking, when you read Bad Conduct Discharge, think Misdemeanor
When you read Dishonorable Discharge, read Felony.
said he had 12 months confinement, which I thought was one definition of a felony?
Reading all this, why does the name Quisling cross my mind?
You never fail to impress. On a side note of unimportant information, my great uncle had to have dealings with him in the late 30's.
Why thank you Scott! Not directing my statement at any one individual or anything. And realizing that in the end, even Faust found redemption. But simply the attitude of some that one can still cut a deal with the devil and come out just fine.
Can't keep a gun, or anything else, away from someone who really wants it but most of these people are just plain [bleep]. They don't have machine shops in their garages. They don't have cartel hookups. And they can still get any gun that they want in the course of an afternoon. Even better than that, [bleep] have discovered black rifles and they're now shooting a dozen or three people at a crack.
It pains me to agree with the fascist left on anything at all but put that reflexive opposition aside and M4s for everyone scares the chit out of me.
I think marksmanship and responsible use of firearms should be taught in PE class for both girls and boys starting in the 8th grade. Now that does not mean a big investment in a shooting facility at each school. These things can be taught with quality air rifles just as well as 22's.
Then start shooting teams in schools just like any other extra curricular activity.
That would do two things: 1) The person would be familiar with firearms even if they choose not to own one. The fear caused by unfamiliarity would be vastly reduced.
2) It would improve national security and the effectiveness of the individual soldier as these recruits will not be picking up their weapon for the first time in boot camp. They would already know the basics.
Why?? My best guess, and its strictly a guess, says that most M4's privately owned in this country are already owned by those who couldn't pass a background check. I believe its been that way a very long time, so why be scared of it now. Reacting (ie drama) to an act can often lead one down the wrong path making the wrong decisions.
It is very obvious to me that there is an invisible hand, a shadow hand, directing all of this. We started down the rat hole very slowly at first, but now the momentum has increased exponentially.
What has been taught, starting many years back, has now come full circle. No more do we as a people apply logic/truth to the many different acts that are occurring at a very high and increased rate. Sensitivity/drama is the trump card now and it is how many people see the silently/invisibly manufactured events that now occur. "Give us Barabbas" is now the cry. The shadow hand will only give you "2" choices, when there is a third and that is how they dupe the citizens. Many on here are seeing through portions of it while others see through all of it, but keep in mind that the many fine folks out there with good intentions have been taught there are only 2 choices.
We are coming off eight long years of a racially conflicted president that dedicated his tenure to denying his genetic makeup and destroying the culture that allowed his rise to power . '' '' He squandered the greatest opportunity to unite us and instead drove us farther apart defining us as sub groups struggling against one another.'' '' Living a lie has become commonplace and the order of the day. Whatever values you ascribe to precision shooting should be high among them as it is becoming evident that we do live in a dangerous world and those well meaning buffoons that rule us cannot and will not make it safer to exist.
'' He squandered the greatest opportunity to unite us '' sounds good but it's not reality IMO -NOBODY is going to unite minorities & lefties with us- total pipe dream . Obama or hillary bernie could ''mandella'' us - take everything we've built and own- give it to them and they would still hate us . As can be easily seen many young whites are siding with the enemy of the consevatives .
"It pains me to agree with the fascist left on anything at all but put that reflexive opposition aside and M4s for everyone scares the chit out of me."
You should move to a communist country. You'll fit in better there.
Honest question here. If you know someone possesses guns (or suspect they do) and have reason to believe they aren't qualified due to legal or mental safety issues, what do you do?
Can't do anything unless they are in violation of law or have been deemed by a court as mentally incompetent.
What we have in this country is a tolerance problem, which under Obama, morphed into a celebratory atmosphere for all things dysfunctional and deviant. The US is a society that has suffered fools for far too long, and now the fools walk among us, head held high, "I have rights, I have rights!"
People may be created equal, but they don't stay equal for long. Problem is, PC that the left pushes down our throat "forces" us to endure completely and utterly destructive people, which, of course, is the left themselves. The babies scream for acceptance, fighting in the public sphere for relevance. Hate to point it out, but the failure is OURS, in tolerating the garbage and idiocy of the left. When you don't parent your children, they turn into monsters. Same with the idiots in society if left unchecked.
if i were king for a day, i'd imlement free carry for all. but, it wouldn't take long till the body count would rise, probably. and people would demand that "something be done." then, i as king would be forced to act for the good of the people.
the reality, sad as it is, the US is running against the thought patterns that occur on most of the earth's surface. well, maybe not somalia and some of the arab denominated muslim countries. but otherwise we're in the minority whether we like it or not. it'll take some creative thought to get past all of this.
Gus, your plan would work much better than you think. First off, more guns equals less crime, because an armed society is a polite society, but in addition laws need to make way better for folks defending themselves without fear of legal consequences. Additionally, we'd need to bring back such things as speedy trials and public hangings, and go back to hanging for first offense serious violent crimes, and stop coddling hoodlums. There are serous hardened criminals these days who hardly serve any time, even after five or ten repeat offense. That has to end. So your solution would work just fine all by itself, but other things need doing too to restore our society to sanity.
Why?? My best guess, and its strictly a guess, says that most M4's privately owned in this country are already owned by those who couldn't pass a background check. I believe its been that way a very long time, s
"A person is generally prohibited from possessing a firearm if he has been convicted of a felony or received a dishonorable discharge. However, a lesser form of punitive discharge, such as a BCD, can be received as punishment from either a General or a Special Court-Martial. A general court-martial, even if it resulted in a BCD, and not a DD, is a federal felony conviction and thus would probably generally prohibit a person from possessing a firearm. If the BCD was received as a result of a Special Court-Martial the Special Court-Martial is a federal misdemeanor conviction and does not generally interfere with a person's right to keep and bear arms, unless the conviction otherwise states, such as one that might qualify under the Lautenberg amendment relating to domestic violence misdemeanors."
It said he was convicted of assault, which may have not been reported as a DV conviction
Deceased as young as 18 months, to 77. Yesterday's announcement of 5 to 73 were the wounded at hospital(s). Saying it appears he was shot by citizen, then crashed, called his dad said he wasn't going to make it, then maybe shot himself too. Piece of chit.
Under Dishonorable Conditions That said it also asks about Misdemeanor Domestic Violence and if Felony Conviction (which may or may not have been his case).
There are also conditions to all of that and I am depending on the PRESS to be giving me the CORRECT info and they know less about they military than they do about guns.
So in short, I'm sure whatever the conditions (discharge,4473, Texas etc) will fit their narrative.
And if not, their narrative will turn to "gun show loophole" or "universal background checks" - or "gun ban".
We can all give our opinions, and knock other posters for giving theirs, but one thing is for certain.......if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it. It won't do any good, it won't stop the bad guys from killing, it will only make those who support it "feel good."
There are people who don't need access whatsoever to a firearm, but the problem is in determining who they are, and how to go about keeping them from getting one. For the most part, the laws on the books don't work because the judicial system either fails to act properly, or else the person obtains a gun illegally.
I'll give you an example......there is a law on the books that says a convicted felon cannot be in the possession of a firearm. My neighbor has a druggie son, a convicted felon. He gets caught with a house full of guns, gets arrested, then his daddy's boss who has political connections intervenes, charges are "amended", kid is back out on the street. He hunts deer on his daddy's property, because I've seen him, and nothing is ever done, even though according to the judicial system, he should be locked up for breaking the law.
Things such as that happen everyday across this country. I believe in enforcing the laws on the book, and believe that if we did, we could stop some of the violence from happening. Instead, we let people out of jail who need to be locked up forever, and once out, they continue to do what they doing that caused them to get in trouble in the first place. We will never completely stop people from committing violent acts, because they are going to do so regardless of the weapon used, or the reason they do it. But, I think we can potentially keep some acts from happening by enforcing the laws on the books, and making certain that a person who needs to be in jail, stays in jail.
People killing one another has gone on since Abel and Cain, and will happen as long as there are people on this earth. Cain didn't use a gun to commit that murder, so to blame guns as the reason is useless. Lizzie Borden didn't use a gun, neither did that Pakistani woman who recently murdered 17 of her relatives by poisoning them. Guns are merely a tool, but because they are a very efficient tool, they come under more intense scrutiny than would an axe or a club. Guns aren't the problem, people are, and therefore the answer lies in people control, not gun control.........something that's easier said than done.
I agree with all that, James.
Well said!
Sadly, in the political climate we now live in, the headlines are "26 Killed by Gun" and not "Countless Saved by Good Guy With Firearm".
I was thinking the biggest change we have seen in society is the constant barrage of 24 hours news cycle. I think this plays a roll in the mass shootings. It may give these killers a sense of 15 minutes of fame. They go through life as a nobody and if they commit these heinous crimes their name is plastered all over the country.
1. Shooter was stopped by two good Samaritans before law enforcement could respond. 2. A neighbor engaged the shooter with his own AR-15 and exchanged fire, striking the suspect. 3. Suspect dropped his weapon and fled in his vehicle. 4. Suspect called his father on cell phone while fleeing and said he had been shot and wasn't going to survice. 5. Neighbor flagged down good samaritan #2 and they pursued the shooter at speeds nearing 100 MPH until suspect crashed car off the road. 6. Wounded, there was evidence the shooter then took his own life. 7. There were no entries in the shooters NCIS or TCIS databases that would have prevented purchase (BCD and conviction were not in the databases). 8. Shooter had a security license and was cleared through TCIS as having no criminal record. 9. They have video of the attack from inside the church as the church service was recorded. 10. There was an ongoing domestic violence situation with the suspect and is still being investigated. 11. His mother-in-law attended the church. 12. No religious motive that they are aware of.
From ATF agent:
1. Three guns recovered. Ruger 5.56, Ruger 9mm handgun and Ruger .22 handgun. He had purchased 4 guns legally over 4 years, 2 in Colorado, 2 in Texas. 2. ATF says they cannot yet confirm his conviction and discharge status from the Air Force.
I was thinking the biggest change we have seen in society is the constant barrage of 24 hours news cycle. I think this plays a roll in the mass shootings. It may give these killers a sense of 15 minutes of fame. They go through life as a nobody and if they commit these heinous crimes their name is plastered all over the country.
Anonymity would seem many time preferable to that sort of infamy.
1. Shooter was stopped by two good Samaritans before law enforcement could respond. 2. A neighbor engaged the shooter with his own AR-15 and exchanged fire, striking the suspect. 3. Suspect dropped his weapon and fled in his vehicle. 4. Suspect called his father on cell phone while fleeing and said he had been shot and wasn't going to survice. 5. Neighbor flagged down good samaritan #2 and they pursued the shooter at speeds nearing 100 MPH until suspect crashed car off the road. 6. Wounded, there was evidence the shooter then took his own life. 7. There were no entries in the shooters NCIS or TCIS databases that would have prevented purchase (BCD and conviction were not in the databases). 8. Shooter had a security license and was cleared through TCIS as having no criminal record. 9. They have video of the attack from inside the church as the church service was recorded. 10. There was an ongoing domestic violence situation with the suspect and is still being investigated. 11. His mother-in-law attended the church. 12. No religious motive that they are aware of.
From ATF agent:
1. Three guns recovered. Ruger 5.56, Ruger 9mm handgun and Ruger .22 handgun. He had purchased 4 guns legally over 4 years, 2 in Colorado, 2 in Texas. 2. ATF says they cannot yet confirm his conviction and discharge status from the Air Force.
What we have in this country is a tolerance problem, which under Obama, morphed into a celebratory atmosphere for all things dysfunctional and deviant. The US is a society that has suffered fools for far too long, and now the fools walk among us, head held high, "I have rights, I have rights!"
People may be created equal, but they don't stay equal for long. Problem is, PC that the left pushes down our throat "forces" us to endure completely and utterly destructive people, which, of course, is the left themselves. The babies scream for acceptance, fighting in the public sphere for relevance. Hate to point it out, but the failure is OURS, in tolerating the garbage and idiocy of the left. When you don't parent your children, they turn into monsters. Same with the idiots in society if left unchecked.
1. Shooter was stopped by two good Samaritans before law enforcement could respond. 2. A neighbor engaged the shooter with his own AR-15 and exchanged fire, striking the suspect. 3. Suspect dropped his weapon and fled in his vehicle. 4. Suspect called his father on cell phone while fleeing and said he had been shot and wasn't going to survice. 5. Neighbor flagged down good samaritan #2 and they pursued the shooter at speeds nearing 100 MPH until suspect crashed car off the road. 6. Wounded, there was evidence the shooter then took his own life. 7. There were no entries in the shooters NCIS or TCIS databases that would have prevented purchase (BCD and conviction were not in the databases). 8. Shooter had a security license and was cleared through TCIS as having no criminal record. 9. They have video of the attack from inside the church as the church service was recorded. 10. There was an ongoing domestic violence situation with the suspect and is still being investigated. 11. His mother-in-law attended the church. 12. No religious motive that they are aware of.
From ATF agent:
1. Three guns recovered. Ruger 5.56, Ruger 9mm handgun and Ruger .22 handgun. He had purchased 4 guns legally over 4 years, 2 in Colorado, 2 in Texas. 2. ATF says they cannot yet confirm his conviction and discharge status from the Air Force.
...if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it.
One of the problems we face is folks giving up way to easy.
Why?? My best guess, and its strictly a guess, says that most M4's privately owned in this country are already owned by those who couldn't pass a background check. I believe its been that way a very long time, so why be scared of it now. Reacting (ie drama) to an act can often lead one down the wrong path making the wrong decisions.
It is very obvious to me that there is an invisible hand, a shadow hand, directing all of this. We started down the rat hole very slowly at first, but now the momentum has increased exponentially.
What has been taught, starting many years back, has now come full circle. No more do we as a people apply logic/truth to the many different acts that are occurring at a very high and increased rate. Sensitivity/drama is the trump card now and it is how many people see the silently/invisibly manufactured events that now occur. "Give us Barabbas" is now the cry. The shadow hand will only give you "2" choices, when there is a third and that is how they dupe the citizens. Many on here are seeing through portions of it while others see through all of it, but keep in mind that the many fine folks out there with good intentions have been taught there are only 2 choices.
Maybe "M4" needs to be defined.(Are you talking M4 generic term for a 16 inch barrelled AR carbine type or U.S. Property M4?) and so on. Lots of terms floating around these days.
...if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it.
One of the problems we face is folks giving up way to easy.
...if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it.
One of the problems we face is folks giving up way to easy.
Exactly.
They don't want to ban ARs, high cap mags, have more detailed checks etc. They want to ban all and confiscate all firearms. That's the only way gun control could be totally effective, looking at it criticallly, in their view. We can't allow it. We know that. Battles ahead.
...if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it.
One of the problems we face is folks giving up way to easy.
...if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it.
One of the problems we face is folks giving up way to easy.
Exactly.
It's not folks giving up easy, as most of us who post on here would not. But, like it or not, we are fast becoming the minority in this country. Just stop and think about how much the face of this nation has changed in our lifetimes. I'm 67, and can remember when something like this would never have happened. We were different. Our thinking was different. Most folks identified as being Christian. When someone got out of line, they got put back in pretty quick. A teacher or principal would whip your butt if you got in trouble.....and when your parents found out, you'd probably get another one.
It is nothing like that today. Kids are raised much, much differently than most of us were. Families do not have the same meaning as ours did. Peoples values have changed. When I was growing up, if a girl got pregnant, she either was sent off to have the baby, or got married. It was scandalous, regardless. A White girl never, ever would have even thought about getting knocked up by a Negro buck. Now days, that's an everyday sight at Walmart. People are just doing things in a much different manner.
All of which brings us to the current discussion. Whereas you and I see a need to arm ourselves and make sure that we have that right forever, there are people who do not see what we see, and don't care about what we want. We can fight all we want to in order to make certain that we don't lose our Second Amendment rights, but for every one of us, there is at least one, and probably two, who don't see it our way. I know some of y'all will think I'm wrong, but it's just the way it is. Most of us think that because we live in a gun friendly state, that we are safe, and we may be for a while. But, across this country, not everyone thinks as we do.
This is what I've put together from the Sutherland Church Shooting so far:
1. Shooter was stopped by two good Samaritans before law enforcement could respond. Yes, law enforcement is minutes away when seconds count. 2. A neighbor engaged the shooter with his own AR-15 and exchanged fire, striking the suspect. So you have to figure that had the person who engaged the shooter been inside the church and able to do so immediately far fewer people would have been injured or killed. 3. Suspect dropped his weapon and fled in his vehicle. Which is typical of how these people act when confronted by resistance. Flee or commit suicide. The sooner they face this resistance the sooner that takes effect and the fewer people die. 4. Suspect called his father on cell phone while fleeing and said he had been shot and wasn't going to survive. 5. Neighbor flagged down good Samaritan #2 and they pursued the shooter at speeds nearing 100 MPH until suspect crashed car off the road. Yes, again, police not able to effect any real action in relation to this event. Take the reports afterward, that's about it. 6. Wounded, there was evidence the shooter then took his own life. 7. There were no entries in the shooters NCIS or TCIS databases that would have prevented purchase (BCD and conviction were not in the databases). And there should have been. If he was convicted in the military of domestic violence at the misdemeanor level and given a bad conduct discharge that information should have been available to the data base. 8. Shooter had a security license and was cleared through TCIS as having no criminal record. Again, due to the military failure to enter that into the data base. 9. They have video of the attack from inside the church as the church service was recorded. Every pastor should see this video just so they know the potential of leaving the flock without teeth. 10. There was an ongoing domestic violence situation with the suspect and is still being investigated. 11. His mother-in-law attended the church. There is your motive. Domestic violence and he goes after who supports his wife, or that which she loves. 12. No religious motive that they are aware of. Nope, none
This is what I've put together from the Sutherland Church Shooting so far:
1. Shooter was stopped by two good Samaritans before law enforcement could respond. Yes, law enforcement is minutes away when seconds count. 2. A neighbor engaged the shooter with his own AR-15 and exchanged fire, striking the suspect. So you have to figure that had the person who engaged the shooter been inside the church and able to do so immediately far fewer people would have been injured or killed. 3. Suspect dropped his weapon and fled in his vehicle. Which is typical of how these people act when confronted by resistance. Flee or commit suicide. The sooner they face this resistance the sooner that takes effect and the fewer people die. 4. Suspect called his father on cell phone while fleeing and said he had been shot and wasn't going to survive. 5. Neighbor flagged down good Samaritan #2 and they pursued the shooter at speeds nearing 100 MPH until suspect crashed car off the road. Yes, again, police not able to effect any real action in relation to this event. Take the reports afterward, that's about it. 6. Wounded, there was evidence the shooter then took his own life. 7. There were no entries in the shooters NCIS or TCIS databases that would have prevented purchase (BCD and conviction were not in the databases). And there should have been. If he was convicted in the military of domestic violence at the misdemeanor level and given a bad conduct discharge that information should have been available to the data base. 8. Shooter had a security license and was cleared through TCIS as having no criminal record. Again, due to the military failure to enter that into the data base. 9. They have video of the attack from inside the church as the church service was recorded. Every pastor should see this video just so they know the potential of leaving the flock without teeth. 10. There was an ongoing domestic violence situation with the suspect and is still being investigated. 11. His mother-in-law attended the church. There is your motive. Domestic violence and he goes after who supports his wife, or that which she loves. 12. No religious motive that they are aware of. Nope, none
Has me wondering, was this church a "gun-free zone", that is, did the pastor prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms into the church?
Sad fact is that even if he didn't prohibit it, it is frowned on enough by a large percentage of the Christian community that many or most consider it taboo. This groupthink is part of the problem.
Has me wondering, was this church a "gun-free zone", that is, did the pastor prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms into the church?
a fair question. the pastor and his deacon board would need to answer this point. not that there's a correct answer either way, but their input to the question is essential for a better understanding. if it's a southern baptist church, i can't imagine there was a rule against it?
the nearby neighbor owned a long=gun. was his home on church property, or was he firing from his own property, not that it matters one whit?
This is what I've put together from the Sutherland Church Shooting so far:
2. A neighbor engaged the shooter with his own AR-15 and exchanged fire, striking the suspect. So you have to figure that had the person who engaged the shooter been inside the church and able to do so immediately far fewer people would have been injured or killed.
My understanding is that he initially went to the side of the church and was shooting through the wall before going to the front door to resume shooting. It's not clear that someone inside could have returned fire without knowing exactly where he was standing outside.
Has me wondering, was this church a "gun-free zone", that is, did the pastor prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms into the church?
Sad fact is that even if he didn't prohibit it, it is frowned on enough by a large percentage of the Christian community that many or most consider it taboo. This groupthink is part of the problem.
I have never seen a sign banning guns in churches. EVER.
At any given time there are a dozen known carriers at our church. Our pastor is an investigator with the local sherriffs department so carries all the time
Has me wondering, was this church a "gun-free zone", that is, did the pastor prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms into the church?
Sad fact is that even if he didn't prohibit it, it is frowned on enough by a large percentage of the Christian community that many or most consider it taboo. This groupthink is part of the problem.
I have never seen a sign banning guns in churches. EVER.
Neither have I - but I can tell you that I have been in churches and known others there well enough to know I would be viewed askance for carrying in church (or at all, in many cases) - and many would consider their attitude about it to be justified Biblically (in error, IMO). Not that that would stop me - but I am quite sure that it does stop many.
I'm sure someone has already preached this sermon but I'm continually amazed at how shocked people can be about violent acts against the Christian church. SHOCKED that anyone could commit murder inside a place of worship, SHOCKED that innocent worshippers would have evil visited upon them, SHOCKED that all of a sudden we must now arm ourselves. Get a grip folks. We were told this around 2000 years ago by the Man himself.
And He said to them,“When I sent you without money bag, knapsack, and sandals, did you lack anything?” So they said, “Nothing.”"
"Then He said to them,“But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it,and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one."
A warning to all and he didn't say leave your sword at the church house door. And He wasn't speaking just to his current disciples, but all those to come. Almost like he knew what he was talking about.
Christians especially, at all times be armed. It's Biblical.
Has me wondering, was this church a "gun-free zone", that is, did the pastor prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms into the church?
Don’t know about Texas, but it’s in statute here in Nebraska. #10
Places off-limits when carrying: 1. Police, sheriff, or Nebraska State Patrol station or office; 2. Detention facility, prison, or jail; 3. Courtroom or building containing a courtroom; 4. Polling place during a bona fide election; 5. Meeting of the governing body of a county, public school district, municipality, or other political subdivision; 6. Meeting of the Legislature or a committee of the Legislature; 7. Financial institutions as defined by Nebraska Revised Statutes § 8-101(12); 8. Professional, semi-professional, or collegiate athletic event; 9. School, school grounds, school-owned vehicle, or schoolsponsored activity or athletic event; 10. Place of worship; 11. Emergency room or trauma center; 12. Political rally or fundraiser; 13. Establishment having a liquor license which derives over onehalf of its income from the sale of alcoholic liquor; 14. Any place where the carrying or possession of a firearm is prohibited by state or federal law; 15. Any place or premises or employer owned vehicle where those in control of the place, premises or vehicle have prohibited permit holders from carrying concealed handguns; or 16. Any other place or premises where handguns are prohibited by law or rule or regulation.
Has me wondering, was this church a "gun-free zone", that is, did the pastor prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms into the church?
Don’t know about Texas, but it’s in statute here in Nebraska. #10
Places off-limits when carrying: 1. Police, sheriff, or Nebraska State Patrol station or office; 2. Detention facility, prison, or jail; 3. Courtroom or building containing a courtroom; 4. Polling place during a bona fide election; 5. Meeting of the governing body of a county, public school district, municipality, or other political subdivision; 6. Meeting of the Legislature or a committee of the Legislature; 7. Financial institutions as defined by Nebraska Revised Statutes § 8-101(12); 8. Professional, semi-professional, or collegiate athletic event; 9. School, school grounds, school-owned vehicle, or schoolsponsored activity or athletic event; 10. Place of worship; 11. Emergency room or trauma center; 12. Political rally or fundraiser; 13. Establishment having a liquor license which derives over onehalf of its income from the sale of alcoholic liquor; 14. Any place where the carrying or possession of a firearm is prohibited by state or federal law; 15. Any place or premises or employer owned vehicle where those in control of the place, premises or vehicle have prohibited permit holders from carrying concealed handguns; or 16. Any other place or premises where handguns are prohibited by law or rule or regulation.
Well, that list leaves it open to be prohibited just about anywhere but at home. Number 16 is a catch-all. Not surprising, as it's Nebraska.
Why?? My best guess, and its strictly a guess, says that most M4's privately owned in this country are already owned by those who couldn't pass a background check. I believe its been that way a very long time, s
Balderdash.
Really? Now how can we factually know if I'm right or wrong?
How do you deal with number 13? Well, here at Where Ever's we don't sell anything but peanuts. With each $3 peanut you get a free beer. With each $6 fancy peanut you get a free mixed drink.
How do you deal with number 13? Well, here at Where Ever's we don't sell anything but peanuts. With each $3 peanut you get a free beer. With each $6 fancy peanut you get a free mixed drink.
I wish you would open a sports peanut bar near me; good prices.
Why?? My best guess, and its strictly a guess, says that most M4's privately owned in this country are already owned by those who couldn't pass a background check. I believe its been that way a very long time, s
Balderdash.
Really? Now how can we factually know if I'm right or wrong?
What exactly is your point regarding this? It ain't making much sense TO ME . Just seeking clarification. Thanks.
Why?? My best guess, and its strictly a guess, says that most M4's privately owned in this country are already owned by those who couldn't pass a background check. I believe its been that way a very long time, s
Balderdash.
Really? Now how can we factually know if I'm right or wrong?
What exactly is your point regarding this? It ain't making much sense TO ME . Just seeking clarification. Thanks.
Who? Me.
I was using the posters usage of M4 and took it to mean M16.
North Dakota likewise, one cannot carry in a place of worship unless given express permission to do so by the head of that church. And that was only allowed in the past couple of years.
I find most CCW laws are actually written to be infringements upon the rights guaranteed in the 2nd.
...if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it.
One of the problems we face is folks giving up way to easy.
Amen. Crossfire took a lot of posters to the woodshed over such defeatism.
We do not need a concealed carry permit in Maine. We cannot, however, carry concealed in courthouses, state parks, Acadia National Park, schools, federal buildings, State capitol, private property where prohibited by the owner, places selling liquor if posted as such, labor disputes or strikes, or during our archery deer season.
OK guys, answer me this. If its a BCD on the assault charges against his wife and kid, doesn't that count as domestic violence? If so, he couldn't legally obtain a firearm...
If there is some legal technicality between the military and civilian courts, then we just plain aren't hard enough on our criminals ( big news flash there!) anyway, I asking, because I truly don't know. Educate me.
'Gwe: The only place where this could have possibly shown up is on a background check IF he purchased the firearm through a dealer and or if he annotated it (which I doubt) on the 4473. A BCD will show up on a NAC (National agency Check). A BCD allows you to purchase weapons BUT a DV charge proscribes it under Lautenberg like JoeBob noted.
And to go further, one's BCD can be on a crime that was a felony, which will prohibit. That said, GENERALLY speaking, when you read Bad Conduct Discharge, think Misdemeanor
When you read Dishonorable Discharge, read Felony.
said he had 12 months confinement, which I thought was one definition of a felony?
(not a lawyer, obviously)
Sycamore
Up to 12 months, no, not necessarily. If the max could have been say 4 years but they only gave him 1 year, then yes it's a felony. A year and under, and the max allowed was 1 year or under, then no.
How do you deal with number 13? Well, here at Where Ever's we don't sell anything but peanuts. With each $3 peanut you get a free beer. With each $6 fancy peanut you get a free mixed drink.
Actually it’s not hard, Bar on the corner that only serves booze and a few burgers, nope. Restraunt and lounge yep, unless it’s posted. But it really doesn’t matter as unlike some states you can’t drink and carry. Period.
Again in statute.
Section 019.04, Nebraska Administrative Code, Title 272, Chapter 21
"A permit holder shall not carry a concealed handgun while consuming alcohol or while there is any previously consumed alcohol or controlled substance as defined in Nebraska Revised Statutes 28-401 of the statutes in his or her blood, urine, or breath unless the controlled substance was lawfully obtained and taken in therapeutically prescribed amounts."
Do believe that covers open carry also but there hasn’t been a statute up date to that lately.
Reading all this, why does the name Quisling cross my mind?
You never fail to impress. On a side note of unimportant information, my great uncle had to have dealings with him in the late 30's.
That has to be an interesting story.
I would think so!
No, not really other than I know it occurred. I misspoke, it was my great great uncle. So in short his was my great grandfather's brother. He was mayor of Berlin from 31 to 35 and then a special envoy to Norway for Hitler until his death in 39. He actually died in Norway.
Mass shooters like mass targets. And they don't CARE about the fact that normal people might be squeamish about carrying in church. In fact, it's an advantage. But in a CHURCH. I'm not religious, but how sick and twisted is that? Some places should be holy....sometimes I wish God would affirm his existence with a few bolts from the blue. I am really starting to consider case carry, just another pocket in my Dewalt man-purse with my laptop and paperwork.
Those guys that chased that SOB down are true Americans....running to danger, grabbing iron instead of selfies. Hope they get medals.
OK guys, answer me this. If its a BCD on the assault charges against his wife and kid, doesn't that count as domestic violence? If so, he couldn't legally obtain a firearm...
If there is some legal technicality between the military and civilian courts, then we just plain aren't hard enough on our criminals ( big news flash there!) anyway, I asking, because I truly don't know. Educate me.
'Gwe: The only place where this could have possibly shown up is on a background check IF he purchased the firearm through a dealer and or if he annotated it (which I doubt) on the 4473. A BCD will show up on a NAC (National agency Check). A BCD allows you to purchase weapons BUT a DV charge proscribes it under Lautenberg like JoeBob noted.
And to go further, one's BCD can be on a crime that was a felony, which will prohibit. That said, GENERALLY speaking, when you read Bad Conduct Discharge, think Misdemeanor
When you read Dishonorable Discharge, read Felony.
said he had 12 months confinement, which I thought was one definition of a felony?
This is what I've put together from the Sutherland Church Shooting so far:
2. A neighbor engaged the shooter with his own AR-15 and exchanged fire, striking the suspect. So you have to figure that had the person who engaged the shooter been inside the church and able to do so immediately far fewer people would have been injured or killed.
My understanding is that he initially went to the side of the church and was shooting through the wall before going to the front door to resume shooting. It's not clear that someone inside could have returned fire without knowing exactly where he was standing outside.
...if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it.
One of the problems we face is folks giving up way to easy.
Exactly.
It's not folks giving up easy, as most of us who post on here would not. But, like it or not, we are fast becoming the minority in this country. Just stop and think about how much the face of this nation has changed in our lifetimes. I'm 67, and can remember when something like this would never have happened. We were different. Our thinking was different. Most folks identified as being Christian. When someone got out of line, they got put back in pretty quick. A teacher or principal would whip your butt if you got in trouble.....and when your parents found out, you'd probably get another one.
It is nothing like that today. Kids are raised much, much differently than most of us were. Families do not have the same meaning as ours did. Peoples values have changed. When I was growing up, if a girl got pregnant, she either was sent off to have the baby, or got married. It was scandalous, regardless. A White girl never, ever would have even thought about getting knocked up by a Negro buck. Now days, that's an everyday sight at Walmart. People are just doing things in a much different manner.
All of which brings us to the current discussion. Whereas you and I see a need to arm ourselves and make sure that we have that right forever, there are people who do not see what we see, and don't care about what we want. We can fight all we want to in order to make certain that we don't lose our Second Amendment rights, but for every one of us, there is at least one, and probably two, who don't see it our way. I know some of y'all will think I'm wrong, but it's just the way it is. Most of us think that because we live in a gun friendly state, that we are safe, and we may be for a while. But, across this country, not everyone thinks as we do.
James, I agree that there has been a drastic change in our culture and in many aspects of it. I'm 68 so am right with your thoughts as expressed here.
I imagine it's a many faceted thing but I have an idea that I believe is at the root of it all. I'll fast-forward here though this response is not readily amenable to "word-bytes." In the Enlightenment, the humanist ideal was elevated above all including the church and the church's authority. Comes the 19th century with Hutton, Lyle, especially Darwin, then the Huxleys, all atheists, or at best the vaguest form of deist. Darwinism, a presupposional philosophy, was brought to the forefront in the following decades by scientists whose a priori premise was "no God allowed" was then taught as fact in public schools since 1959 in the BSCS curriculum. It was instigated by the government at the 100th anniversary of Darwin's Origin of Species as urged by the scientific community.
So,..we now have ~ 3 generations taught that materialistic evolution is fact -- it s not. This philosophy held with religious fervor is soon to becomes its own fossil but that is another story.
Much of this philosophy has affected the church also but here is my posit: you can see the parallel cultural devolution -- abortion, immorality, corruption, crime, murder, etc. -- to the over half century of teaching this godless philosophy to our young. There have always been the insane and the criminally evil but now add to this the existential pathos of being nothing but a clever animal and that death is the end. You can sense that to the tortured mind, death by any means would be a relief, especially to the mind burdened with hate or fear or depression.
Edit: BTW, a partial listing of the luminaries influenced by Darwin's evolutionary theory (incidentally, the subtitle to "Origins" was "the Survival of the Favored Races in the Fight for Survival") includes Marx and then Stalin, Freud, Hitler, Mao, Polpot, amd Margaret Sanger, a group directly or indirectly responsible for more deaths than anybody else and all the wars of all the ages combined.
...if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it.
One of the problems we face is folks giving up way to easy.
Exactly.
It's not folks giving up easy, as most of us who post on here would not. But, like it or not, we are fast becoming the minority in this country. Just stop and think about how much the face of this nation has changed in our lifetimes. I'm 67, and can remember when something like this would never have happened. We were different. Our thinking was different. Most folks identified as being Christian. When someone got out of line, they got put back in pretty quick. A teacher or principal would whip your butt if you got in trouble.....and when your parents found out, you'd probably get another one.
It is nothing like that today. Kids are raised much, much differently than most of us were. Families do not have the same meaning as ours did. Peoples values have changed. When I was growing up, if a girl got pregnant, she either was sent off to have the baby, or got married. It was scandalous, regardless. A White girl never, ever would have even thought about getting knocked up by a Negro buck. Now days, that's an everyday sight at Walmart. People are just doing things in a much different manner.
All of which brings us to the current discussion. Whereas you and I see a need to arm ourselves and make sure that we have that right forever, there are people who do not see what we see, and don't care about what we want. We can fight all we want to in order to make certain that we don't lose our Second Amendment rights, but for every one of us, there is at least one, and probably two, who don't see it our way. I know some of y'all will think I'm wrong, but it's just the way it is. Most of us think that because we live in a gun friendly state, that we are safe, and we may be for a while. But, across this country, not everyone thinks as we do.
James, I agree that there has been a drastic change in our culture and in many aspects of it. I'm 68 so am right with your thoughts as expressed here.
I imagine it's a many faceted thing but I have an idea that I believe is at the root of it all. I'll fast-forward here though this response is not readily amenable to "word-bytes." In the Enlightenment, the humanist ideal was elevated above all including the church and the church's authority. Comes the 19th century with Hutton, Lyle, especially Darwin, then the Huxleys, all atheists, or at best the vaguest form of deist. Darwinism, a presupposional philosophy, was brought to the forefront in the following decades by scientists whose a priori premise was "no God allowed" was then taught as fact in public schools since 1959 in the BSCS curriculum. It was instigated by the government at the 100th anniversary of Darwin's Origin of Species as urged by the scientific community.
So,..we now have ~ 3 generations taught that materialistic evolution is fact -- it s not. This philosophy held with religious fervor is soon to becomes its own fossil but that is another story.
Much of this philosophy has affected the church also but here is my posit: you can see the parallel cultural devolution -- abortion, immorality, corruption, crime, murder, etc. -- to the over half century of teaching this godless philosophy to our young. There have always been the insane and the criminally evil but now add to this the existential pathos of being nothing but a clever animal and that death is the end. You can sense that to the tortured mind, death by any means would be a relief, especially to the mind burdened with hate or fear or depression.
Edit: BTW, a partial listing of the luminaries influenced by Darwin's evolutionary theory (incidentally, the subtitle to "Origins" was "the Survival of the Favored Races in the Fight for Survival") includes Marx and then Stalin, Freud, Hitler, Mao, Polpot, amd Margaret Sanger, a group directly or indirectly responsible for more deaths than anybody else and all the wars of all the ages combined.
Now it's Darwin's fault! I love it.
Talk about whacko blame games. Even liberals can't top this one.
For anyone that still believes that FOX News is our friend think again. I just watched a "hit piece" video blaming the lax gun laws in the state of Texas for the shooting. They (Fox News) said that Texas doesn't register all guns, they don't require a waiting period, they said that you can carry a loaded weapon in your motor vehicle... I couldn't watch it to the end..
For anyone that still believes that FOX News is our friend think again. I just watched a "hit piece" video blaming the lax gun laws in the state of Texas for the shooting. They (Fox News) said that Texas doesn't register all guns, they don't require a waiting period, they said that you can carry a loaded weapon in your motor vehicle... I couldn't watch it to the end..
Maybe "M4" needs to be defined.(Are you talking M4 generic term for a 16 inch barrelled AR carbine type or U.S. Property M4?) and so on. Lots of terms floating around these days.
In my opinion, the term M-4 is merely a configuration.
Beyond that, there are many M-4 carbines that made their way to civilian markets years ago. They are perfectly legal.. In fact, I bought one years ago. It has a U.S. serial number and military acceptance marks.
I recently put a new upper on it and did my paint thingy on it yo camo it, added an ACE stock. But the lower is indeed a military item that is now privately and legally owned.
For anyone that still believes that FOX News is our friend think again. I just watched a "hit piece" video blaming the lax gun laws in the state of Texas for the shooting. They (Fox News) said that Texas doesn't register all guns, they don't require a waiting period, they said that you can carry a loaded weapon in your motor vehicle... I couldn't watch it to the end..
For anyone that still believes that FOX News is our friend think again. I just watched a "hit piece" video blaming the lax gun laws in the state of Texas for the shooting. They (Fox News) said that Texas doesn't register all guns, they don't require a waiting period, they said that you can carry a loaded weapon in your motor vehicle... I couldn't watch it to the end..
While all that is mostly true....
The weapons in question were bought by the nutjob in an Academy store using the BATFE Form 4473, and he passed a NICS background check because the military didn't report the domestic violence conviction.
Mass shooters like mass targets. And they don't CARE about the fact that normal people might be squeamish about carrying in church. In fact, it's an advantage. But in a CHURCH. I'm not religious, but how sick and twisted is that? Some places should be holy....sometimes I wish God would affirm his existence with a few bolts from the blue. I am really starting to consider case carry, just another pocket in my Dewalt man-purse with my laptop and paperwork.
Those guys that chased that SOB down are true Americans....running to danger, grabbing iron instead of selfies. Hope they get medals.
Agree the guys that ran him down like the POS cur he was are heroes!
One correction: Mass shooters target SOFT mass targets.
Reading all this, why does the name Quisling cross my mind?
You never fail to impress. On a side note of unimportant information, my great uncle had to have dealings with him in the late 30's.
That has to be an interesting story.
I would think so!
No, not really other than I know it occurred. I misspoke, it was my great great uncle. So in short his was my great grandfather's brother. He was mayor of Berlin from 31 to 35 and then a special envoy to Norway for Hitler until his death in 39. He actually died in Norway.
\
It is interesting. It sounds like he was the envoy to Quisling's equivalent to the Nazi party which Quisling had going.
Maybe "M4" needs to be defined.(Are you talking M4 generic term for a 16 inch barrelled AR carbine type or U.S. Property M4?) and so on. Lots of terms floating around these days.
In my opinion, the term M-4 is merely a configuration.
Beyond that, there are many M-4 carbines that made their way to civilian markets years ago. They are perfectly legal.. In fact, I bought one years ago. It has a U.S. serial number and military acceptance marks.
I recently put a new upper on it and did my paint thingy on it yo camo it, added an ACE stock. But the lower is indeed a military item that is now privately and legally owned.
The US military acceptance stamp on it.
Okay. To me M4 is full auto capable and was military or somehow got out from Colt to the civilian side before the ban under Reagan for manufacture. And there are very few of those around in civilian hands (as M4. There are a good number of AR-15's and M16 types around.).
But for one poster to say that most are not legally owned is interesting.
There may be a few full auto weapons missing and in the hands of criminals, but you sure don't hear of them being used much. If they were...the MSM would all over it like ugly on ape.
My guess is that most stolen full autos go to Mexico, or other war theaters in 3rd world countries.
*Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06 or 30.07.
If the church has a 30.06 or 30.07 sign posted, the CCW cannot carry there. If they don't post the premises with the required signage, than they can carry in church.
not necessarily.
30.06 signage is not the only way to give legal 'effective notice'...A property owner (or authorised agent of) can verbally inform you no carry is allowed on that property. Section (b) of TPC 30.06 states that a person is considered to have received notice if the owner of the property, or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner, provides notice by oral or written communication that the carrying of a concealed handgun is prohibited.
Now, even if a compliant 30.06 no carry was displayed, a property owner/agent can still provide verbal 'effective consent' to carry on that private property. On the other hand, even if non -compliant 30.06 signage is displayed, all a property owner has to do is say "“concealed handguns are not allowed here," and if you don't leave it becomes criminal trespass.
To ignore the 30.06 sign = Class C misdemeanor Refusing to leave = Class A misdemeanor.
I just heard on Fox news that the Air Force did not submit the records to the FBI that would have kept him from legally buying firearms. Huge screw up.
*Subsections (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6), and (c) do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06 or 30.07.
If the church has a 30.06 or 30.07 sign posted, the CCW cannot carry there. If they don't post the premises with the required signage, than they can carry in church.
not necessarily.
30.06 signage is not the only way to give legal 'effective notice'...A property owner (or authorised agent of) can verbally inform you no carry is allowed on that property. Section (b) of TPC 30.06 states that a person is considered to have received notice if the owner of the property, or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner, provides notice by oral or written communication that the carrying of a concealed handgun is prohibited.
now, even if a 30.06 no carry was displayed, a property owner/agent can still provide verbal 'effective consent' to carry on that private property.
Damn.
You are fuggin expert in everything. Even Texas law.
Fuggin' lowyers... Always trying to skirt the intent.
Yeah, if the owner or manager sees someone they don't want carrying in their building, they can order them out. Einstein.
...if these mass shootings continue, there WILL be some new forms of gun control. You can take that to the bank!! It will happen, and there will be nothing that we can do about it.
One of the problems we face is folks giving up way to easy.
Exactly.
It's not folks giving up easy, as most of us who post on here would not. But, like it or not, we are fast becoming the minority in this country. Just stop and think about how much the face of this nation has changed in our lifetimes. I'm 67, and can remember when something like this would never have happened. We were different. Our thinking was different. Most folks identified as being Christian. When someone got out of line, they got put back in pretty quick. A teacher or principal would whip your butt if you got in trouble.....and when your parents found out, you'd probably get another one.
It is nothing like that today. Kids are raised much, much differently than most of us were. Families do not have the same meaning as ours did. Peoples values have changed. When I was growing up, if a girl got pregnant, she either was sent off to have the baby, or got married. It was scandalous, regardless. A White girl never, ever would have even thought about getting knocked up by a Negro buck. Now days, that's an everyday sight at Walmart. People are just doing things in a much different manner.
All of which brings us to the current discussion. Whereas you and I see a need to arm ourselves and make sure that we have that right forever, there are people who do not see what we see, and don't care about what we want. We can fight all we want to in order to make certain that we don't lose our Second Amendment rights, but for every one of us, there is at least one, and probably two, who don't see it our way. I know some of y'all will think I'm wrong, but it's just the way it is. Most of us think that because we live in a gun friendly state, that we are safe, and we may be for a while. But, across this country, not everyone thinks as we do.
James, I agree that there has been a drastic change in our culture and in many aspects of it. I'm 68 so am right with your thoughts as expressed here.
I imagine it's a many faceted thing but I have an idea that I believe is at the root of it all. I'll fast-forward here though this response is not readily amenable to "word-bytes." In the Enlightenment, the humanist ideal was elevated above all including the church and the church's authority. Comes the 19th century with Hutton, Lyle, especially Darwin, then the Huxleys, all atheists, or at best the vaguest form of deist. Darwinism, a presupposional philosophy, was brought to the forefront in the following decades by scientists whose a priori premise was "no God allowed" was then taught as fact in public schools since 1959 in the BSCS curriculum. It was instigated by the government at the 100th anniversary of Darwin's Origin of Species as urged by the scientific community.
So,..we now have ~ 3 generations taught that materialistic evolution is fact -- it s not. This philosophy held with religious fervor is soon to becomes its own fossil but that is another story.
Much of this philosophy has affected the church also but here is my posit: you can see the parallel cultural devolution -- abortion, immorality, corruption, crime, murder, etc. -- to the over half century of teaching this godless philosophy to our young. There have always been the insane and the criminally evil but now add to this the existential pathos of being nothing but a clever animal and that death is the end. You can sense that to the tortured mind, death by any means would be a relief, especially to the mind burdened with hate or fear or depression.
Edit: BTW, a partial listing of the luminaries influenced by Darwin's evolutionary theory (incidentally, the subtitle to "Origins" was "the Survival of the Favored Races in the Fight for Survival") includes Marx and then Stalin, Freud, Hitler, Mao, Polpot, amd Margaret Sanger, a group directly or indirectly responsible for more deaths than anybody else and all the wars of all the ages combined.
Well said George.
I don't know if there was a singular tipping point, but 1973 hits me as watershed year. That's when we as a society dismissed a mother having her unborn child torn limb from limb in her womb as a personal choice. It seems hypocritical that a society that takes that step can be somehow shocked by mass shootings.
It's a philosophy that has affected many sir, personally and corporately; that is my point.
Science isn't a political philosophy. You folks need to face facts ... literally nothing in modern, biology-related, science, makes any sense absent evolution being true, and if evolution weren't true, the biological sciences (medicine, genetics, on and on and on) would be about where they were a hundred and fifty years ago. It's the central organizing principle of all sciences related to living things.
PS Evolution doesn't say there is no God, or that creation wasn't brought about by divine command. It makes no statements about God or the origin of life at all. It's just what science has figured out about the nature of life and speciation.
Terrible weekend for Texas, but this would have been a normal weekend in Chicago, and I haven't heard anyone saying anything about that.
Happened about an hour north of me.
Lots of people are upset. Not because of death, but because of who they were, what they were doing, and how they died.
This was an act of evil. Pure and simple. Targeted Christians too. When Christians are targeted, there's no other explanation. Christians were the target...no matter how mentally impaired, or evil the shooter was.
Terrible weekend for Texas, but this would have been a normal weekend in Chicago, and I haven't heard anyone saying anything about that.
Happened about an hour north of me.
Lots of people are upset. Not because of death, but because of who they were, what they were doing, and how they died.
This was an act of evil. Pure and simple. Targeted Christians too. When Christians are targeted, there's no other explanation. Christians were the target...no matter how mentally impaired, or evil the shooter was.
And each one of the dead are Christian martyrs who are, right now, with Christ in heaven. Going to church is a statement about belief in Christ, and they died for that statement.
Terrible weekend for Texas, but this would have been a normal weekend in Chicago, and I haven't heard anyone saying anything about that.
Happened about an hour north of me.
Lots of people are upset. Not because of death, but because of who they were, what they were doing, and how they died.
This was an act of evil. Pure and simple. Targeted Christians too. When Christians are targeted, there's no other explanation. Christians were the target...no matter how mentally impaired, or evil the shooter was.
Yes, Christians were the target, and of all the places we can go, church is supposed to be safest. But, when some idiot uses an "assault rifle" to commit a heinous act like this, the libs immediately want to place restrictions on them. Yet, just as many people, 99% Black, are shot or killed practically every weekend in Chicago, and we hear nothing about the libs wanting to put restrictions on those 9mm pistols.
There is a liberal bias, plain and simple........restrict law abiding folks from having a gun, but allow criminal minorities to have them. At least that's the way I see it.
It's a philosophy that has affected many sir, personally and corporately; that is my point.
The same could said about Einstein's relatively theory, the earth is round theory, and the Pythagorean theorem. Among others. None of which are really relevant here either.
And each one of the dead are Christian martyrs who are, right now, with Christ in heaven. Going to church is a statement about belief in Christ, and they died for that statement.
Re: in Heaven with Christ....are you sure? When the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God, the dead will rise from the grave.
but you are saying the Texas church victims have circumvented the time of final judgement by Jesus?
Merely going to a church is not authentic evidence about actual devoted faith in Christ. as far as simply 'believing' in christ , well even the devil believes in Christ...and maybe the shooter did also!
Theres nothing any christian can do on earth to find special or express favor with God, since God deems all of mankind unworthy of God....hence why he offers his grace.
It's a philosophy that has affected many sir, personally and corporately; that is my point.
Science isn't a political philosophy. You folks need to face facts ... literally nothing in modern, biology-related, science, makes any sense absent evolution being true, and if evolution weren't true, the biological sciences (medicine, genetics, on and on and on) would be about where they were a hundred and fifty years ago. It's the central organizing principle of all sciences related to living things.
PS Evolution doesn't say there is no God, or that creation wasn't brought about by divine command. It makes no statements about God or the origin of life at all. It's just what science has figured out about the nature of life and speciation.
.
You mean nothing makes sense to the limited, shallow and narrow experiences of human experience when contemplating what an omnipotent God can or cannot do? Apparently you are berift of a few facts yourself. Well, more than a few actually.
I think the ad hominem "you folks" is beneath you.
It's a philosophy that has affected many sir, personally and corporately; that is my point.
The same could said about Einstein's relatively theory, the earth is round theory, and the Pythagorean theorem. Among others. None of which are really relevant here either.
I believe those are of a different nature. Getting past the gun issue, the superficials and the obvious and taking a birds eye view of these increasing incidents in the context of a declining western world culture was the attempt.
Even the listening to and the polite disagreement to another's opinion or viewpoint seems to be a lost sensibility.
So far every story line I have read from different sources claim he was carrying an "Assault Rifle". Bullshit he was carrying a Ruger simi-auto rifle. They could have said it was an AR and left it at that. The term Assault Rifle was coined by Adolph Hitler. AR stands for Armalite Rifle.
It really is dishonest to use terms that vilify specific firearms and just about all media outlets do it for effect.
It's a philosophy that has affected many sir, personally and corporately; that is my point.
Science isn't a political philosophy. You folks need to face facts ... literally nothing in modern, biology-related, science, makes any sense absent evolution being true, and if evolution weren't true, the biological sciences (medicine, genetics, on and on and on) would be about where they were a hundred and fifty years ago. It's the central organizing principle of all sciences related to living things.
PS Evolution doesn't say there is no God, or that creation wasn't brought about by divine command. It makes no statements about God or the origin of life at all. It's just what science has figured out about the nature of life and speciation.
I was educated as a biologist and I think TRH has put it well. Science is basically a methodology and doesn't say anything about God or religion. There is an enormous amount of evidence supporting evolutionary theory and it underlies all of modern biological science.
It's a philosophy that has affected many sir, personally and corporately; that is my point.
The same could said about Einstein's relatively theory, the earth is round theory, and the Pythagorean theorem. Among others. None of which are really relevant here either.
I believe those are of a different nature. Getting past the gun issue, the superficials and the obvious and taking a birds eye view of these increasing incidents in the context of a declining western world culture was the attempt.
Even the listening to and the polite disagreement to another's opinion or viewpoint seems to be a lost sensibility.
Nothing impolite at all, and I am definitely listening to you. There is nothing different about "those" that makes them even less relevant that evolution which is, of course, not relevant at all. You have knitted one agenda into another and the patches don't work - at all.
And each one of the dead are Christian martyrs who are, right now, with Christ in heaven. Going to church is a statement about belief in Christ, and they died for that statement.
Re: in Heaven with Christ....are you sure? When the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God, the dead will rise from the grave.
but you are saying the Texas church victims have circumvented the time of final judgement by Jesus?
Merely going to a church is not authentic evidence about actual devoted faith in Christ. as far as simply 'believing' in christ , well even the devil believes in Christ.
Theres nothing any christian can do on earth to find special or express favor with God, since God deems all of mankind unworthy of God....hence why he offers his grace.
"This day you will be with me in paradise." "Abraham saw my day and rejoiced." "God is not the God of the dead but of the living." "He that loseth his life for my sake shall find it."
Their attendance is a witness to their faith. They lost their lives for the sake of their witness to Christ.
Their attendance is a witness to their faith. They lost their lives for the sake of their witness to Christ.
The real reasons/motives why any or all of those people attended church are only known to God. plenty of fakes and hypocrites go to church, and they can get shot and killed just as easy as anyone else who may be in church in for more authentic reasons.
Their attendance is a witness to their faith. They lost their lives for the sake of their witness to Christ.
The real reasons/motives why any or all of those people attended church are only known to God. plenty of fakes and hypocrites go to church, and they can get shot and killed just as easy as anyone else who may be in church in for more authentic reasons.
I think it's uncharitable for you to question their motives for attending Christian worship.
Sir, the gunman also "went to church ". I don't think he is welcome yet into Heaven.
Was he killed for his witness. That's what I'm referring to.
He went to church, and he died for it. That much is fact. Just being there is not enough by itself. Personally, I have never understood why I need to go anywhere to talk with God, since he is everywhere, and in all things. Other than weddings and funerals, I haven't been inside the building since my wedding. I'm closest to God. 20' up a tree, watching the world awake, waiting to kill something.
I think it's uncharitable for you to question their motives for attending Christian worship.
and I consider it grossly naive of you to assume what was or wasnt present in the hearts of those shooting victims. Again, that is only something known to God.
Since I don't know, I will question rather than foolishly assume. One things for sure, they were all sinners full of transgressions.
Their attendance is a witness to their faith. They lost their lives for the sake of their witness to Christ.
The real reasons/motives why any or all of those people attended church are only known to God. plenty of fakes and hypocrites go to church, and they can get shot and killed just as easy as anyone else who may be in church in for more authentic reasons.
Boy howdy -- These victims were BAPTISTS. They're the only ones gettin' in...
Sir, the gunman also "went to church ". I don't think he is welcome yet into Heaven.
Was he killed for his witness. That's what I'm referring to.
He went to church, and he died for it. That much is fact. Just being there is not enough by itself. Personally, I have never understood why I need to go anywhere to talk with God, since he is everywhere, and in all things. Other than weddings and funerals, I haven't been inside the building since my wedding. I'm closest to God. 20' up a tree, watching the world awake, waiting to kill something.
I never said you had to go to Church to speak to or worship God.
we can only hope that the wound to the abdomen to the shooter by the neighbor was an upper gut shot and the POS had time to suffer before leaving this world
And each one of the dead are Christian martyrs who are, right now, with Christ in heaven. Going to church is a statement about belief in Christ, and they died for that statement.
Re: in Heaven with Christ....are you sure? When the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God, the dead will rise from the grave.
but you are saying the Texas church victims have circumvented the time of final judgement by Jesus?
Sir, the gunman also "went to church ". I don't think he is welcome yet into Heaven.
Was he killed for his witness. That's what I'm referring to.
He went to church, and he died for it. That much is fact. Just being there is not enough by itself. Personally, I have never understood why I need to go anywhere to talk with God, since he is everywhere, and in all things. Other than weddings and funerals, I haven't been inside the building since my wedding. I'm closest to God. 20' up a tree, watching the world awake, waiting to kill something.
I never said you had to go to Church to speak to or worship God.
No sir, you did not...directly. you did say " And each one of the dead are Christian martyrs who are, right now, with Christ in heaven. Going to church is a statement about belief in Christ, and they died for that statement" I would submit that the statement is not tied to any location, but to a faith or mindset. Otherwise, I would say "point to the physical location of God. The Pearly Gates have what zipcode? How many Angels CAN dance on the head of a pin?
One things for sure, they were all sinners full of transgressions.
Absolutely. So what? "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." Abraham was a sinner, too, but by faith he was accounted righteous. That's the way it works.
The shooter was a born sinner like Abraham, just another transgressor who's transgression took 26 lives.....so what you say...
come final judgement, the shooter can end up in heaven if he repents and receives Gods grace. same offer will be made to his 26 dead sinner victims and Adolf Hitler.....so go ahead , transgress all you like. No reason to go to church, cause it will all be decided at final judgement time.
Their attendance is a witness to their faith. They lost their lives for the sake of their witness to Christ.
The real reasons/motives why any or all of those people attended church are only known to God. plenty of fakes and hypocrites go to church, and they can get shot and killed just as easy as anyone else who may be in church in for more authentic reasons.
I think it's uncharitable for you to question their motives for attending Christian worship.
Sir, the gunman also "went to church ". I don't think he is welcome yet into Heaven.
Was he killed for his witness. That's what I'm referring to.
He went to church, and he died for it. That much is fact. Just being there is not enough by itself. Personally, I have never understood why I need to go anywhere to talk with God, since he is everywhere, and in all things. Other than weddings and funerals, I haven't been inside the building since my wedding. I'm closest to God. 20' up a tree, watching the world awake, waiting to kill something.
I never said you had to go to Church to speak to or worship God.
No sir, you did not...directly. you did say " And each one of the dead are Christian martyrs who are, right now, with Christ in heaven. Going to church is a statement about belief in Christ, and they died for that statement" I would submit that the statement is not tied to any location, but to a faith or mindset. Otherwise, I would say "point to the physical location of God. The Pearly Gates have what zipcode? How many Angels CAN dance on the head of a pin?
I think you're displaying some sort of chip on your shoulder. I didn't say or imply that one could not be a martyr if killed for faith outside of a church. I merely stated that attendance at church is a declaration of faith in Christ, and that they were killed for said declaration, thus making them martyrs.
One things for sure, they were all sinners full of transgressions.
Absolutely. So what? "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." Abraham was a sinner, too, but by faith he was accounted righteous. That's the way it works.
The shooter was a born sinner like Abraham, just another transgressor who's transgression took 26 lives.....so what you say...
come final judgement, the shooter can end up in heaven if he repents and receives Gods grace. same offer will be made to his 26 dead sinner victims and Adolf Hitler.....so go ahead , transgress all you like.
Repentance after death? You really have a screwed up Theology.
It's a philosophy that has affected many sir, personally and corporately; that is my point.
Science isn't a political philosophy. You folks need to face facts ... literally nothing in modern, biology-related, science, makes any sense absent evolution being true, and if evolution weren't true, the biological sciences (medicine, genetics, on and on and on) would be about where they were a hundred and fifty years ago. It's the central organizing principle of all sciences related to living things.
PS Evolution doesn't say there is no God, or that creation wasn't brought about by divine command. It makes no statements about God or the origin of life at all. It's just what science has figured out about the nature of life and speciation.
.
You mean nothing makes sense to the limited, shallow and narrow experiences of human experience when contemplating what an omnipotent God can or cannot do? Apparently you are berift of a few facts yourself. Well, more than a few actually.
I think the ad hominem "you folks" is beneath you.
Your omnipotent god did not protect those worshipers in his Church.
I think you're displaying some sort of chip on your shoulder. I didn't say or imply that one could not be a martyr if killed for faith outside of a church. I merely stated that attendance at church is a declaration of faith in Christ, and that they were killed for said declaration, thus making them martyrs.
One things for sure, they were all sinners full of transgressions.
Absolutely. So what? "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." Abraham was a sinner, too, but by faith he was accounted righteous. That's the way it works.
The shooter was a born sinner like Abraham, just another transgressor who's transgression took 26 lives.....so what you say...
come final judgement, the shooter can end up in heaven if he repents and receives Gods grace. same offer will be made to his 26 dead sinner victims and Adolf Hitler.....so go ahead , transgress all you like. No reason to go to church.
What the heck are you talking about? Where did I say anything of the sort?
It's a philosophy that has affected many sir, personally and corporately; that is my point.
Science isn't a political philosophy. You folks need to face facts ... literally nothing in modern, biology-related, science, makes any sense absent evolution being true, and if evolution weren't true, the biological sciences (medicine, genetics, on and on and on) would be about where they were a hundred and fifty years ago. It's the central organizing principle of all sciences related to living things.
PS Evolution doesn't say there is no God, or that creation wasn't brought about by divine command. It makes no statements about God or the origin of life at all. It's just what science has figured out about the nature of life and speciation.
.
You mean nothing makes sense to the limited, shallow and narrow experiences of human experience when contemplating what an omnipotent God can or cannot do? Apparently you are berift of a few facts yourself. Well, more than a few actually.
I think the ad hominem "you folks" is beneath you.
Your omnipotent god did not protect those worshipers in his Church.
It was a good neighbor with a gun.
God didn't protect his own disciples from death so you're point proves nothing. Actually, God doesn't protect any of us from death that's why he said "It's appointed unto men once to die".
I think you're displaying some sort of chip on your shoulder. I didn't say or imply that one could not be a martyr if killed for faith outside of a church. I merely stated that attendance at church is a declaration of faith in Christ, and that they were killed for said declaration, thus making them martyrs.
And I agree with that.
I think they were killed for being at the wrong place at the wrong time. The shooter was socially alienated looser. Beat up his first wive and her kid (fortunately he did not procreate) and he second wife had left him. Unwilling to accept responsibility for his own short coming, he blamed his second wife's family and lashed out at her family, and the community closest to her heart. According to one report, of unknown quality, his wife's grandmother was among the lost.
It's a philosophy that has affected many sir, personally and corporately; that is my point.
Science isn't a political philosophy. You folks need to face facts ... literally nothing in modern, biology-related, science, makes any sense absent evolution being true, and if evolution weren't true, the biological sciences (medicine, genetics, on and on and on) would be about where they were a hundred and fifty years ago. It's the central organizing principle of all sciences related to living things.
PS Evolution doesn't say there is no God, or that creation wasn't brought about by divine command. It makes no statements about God or the origin of life at all. It's just what science has figured out about the nature of life and speciation.
.
You mean nothing makes sense to the limited, shallow and narrow experiences of human experience when contemplating what an omnipotent God can or cannot do? Apparently you are berift of a few facts yourself. Well, more than a few actually.
I think the ad hominem "you folks" is beneath you.
Your omnipotent god did not protect those worshipers in his Church.
It was a good neighbor with a gun.
God didn't protect his own disciples from death so you're point proves nothing. Actually, God doesn't protect any of us from death that's why he said "It's appointed unto men once to die".
Gods disciples who passed on yesterday at that church will never die. They died to their sin long before yesterday. He gives us free will, a as such Christians will lose their physical life on earth, as you will. But they are alive in Him now, not in the flesh, but in the spirit.
I merely stated that attendance at church is a declaration of faith in Christ,
The mobsters which attend at church and then discuss planned hits on intended victims while under its roof is a demonstration of faith in christ?
They are not kind of 'works' scripture means when stating 'faith without works is dead'..
The idea that attending church automatically make you of the faith is naive and moronic.
You're just making up hypotheticals to support your position. Do you have reason to believe any of the people killed Sunday in that church fit that description?
One things for sure, they were all sinners full of transgressions.
Absolutely. So what? "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." Abraham was a sinner, too, but by faith he was accounted righteous. That's the way it works.
The shooter was a born sinner like Abraham, just another transgressor who's transgression took 26 lives.....so what you say...
come final judgement, the shooter can end up in heaven if he repents and receives Gods grace. same offer will be made to his 26 dead sinner victims and Adolf Hitler.....so go ahead , transgress all you like.
Repentance after death? You really have a screwed up Theology.
Yeah, clueless on that one. Maybe if you are catholic and believe in purgatory you might believe that. To remain in transgression, to remain in your sin:
Hebrews 10:26
If we deliberately go on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no further sacrifice for sins remains,
You're just making up hypotheticals to support your position. Do you have reason to believe any of the people killed Sunday in that church fit that description?
The 26 victims like the shooter, the mafia , Adolf Hitler, etc, etc, are all born sinner -transgressors.
In that they are all equal...and must face the final judgement. explain, How did those 26 victims get ahead of everybody else and get transported instantly to heaven? What authority confirmed to you they don't need to face the final judgement first?
You're just making up hypotheticals to support your position. Do you have reason to believe any of the people killed Sunday in that church fit that description?
There 26 victims like the shooter, the mafia , Adolf Hitler, etc, etc, are all born sinner -transgressors.
In that they are all equal...and must face the final judgement.
explain, How did those 26 victims get ahead of everybody else and get transported instantly to heaven? What authority told you they don't need to face the final judgement first? [/quote]
I see you're still stuck on the condition we are born in. Check into being born again. It's a life changer.
OK guys, answer me this. If its a BCD on the assault charges against his wife and kid, doesn't that count as domestic violence? If so, he couldn't legally obtain a firearm...
If there is some legal technicality between the military and civilian courts, then we just plain aren't hard enough on our criminals ( big news flash there!) anyway, I asking, because I truly don't know. Educate me.
There was a ruling out of the 10th Circuit, here in Colorado, clarifying that the federal statute in question only applied to STATE convictions of DD. This case arose from a guy here in Colorado prosecuted under a city "home rule" ordinance. Since it was not a state statute, as specified in the federal law, his Second Amendment rights remained intact.
So an argument could be made that despite him receiving a bad conduct discharge for beating up his wife and kids, but was prosecuted under UCMJ, i.e. a Federal, not a state statue, and served less than a year and a day, he fell into a crevice.
I see you're still stuck on the condition we are born in. Check into being born again. It's a life changer.
So being a born again christian means you get to escape final judgement and get whisked away to heaven instantly upon ones mortal death?
what version of BIble do you and hawkeye read?
2 Corinthians 5:10-12 (AKJV) 'For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad'.
I merely stated that attendance at church is a declaration of faith in Christ,
The mobsters which attend at church and then discuss planned hits on intended victims while under its roof is a demonstration of faith in christ?
They are not kind of 'works' scripture means when stating 'faith without works is dead'..
The idea that attending church automatically make you of the faith is naive and moronic.
You're just making up hypotheticals to support your position. Do you have reason to believe any of the people killed Sunday in that church fit that description?
I see no reason to blame the victims for the actions of this mad man. The blame lays with the looser, not the victims.
I see you're still stuck on the condition we are born in. Check into being born again. It's a life changer.
So being a born again christian means you get to escape final judgement and get whisked away to heaven instantly upon ones mortal death?
what version of BIble do you and hawkeye read?
2 Corinthians 5:10-12 (AKJV) For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
Believers have their names written in the Book of Life. They will sit at the Judgement Throne of Christ and their sins will be presented to them, but they will live. John 3:16 For those who believe in Him will not be condemned.
. There are two separate judgments. Believers are judged at the Judgment Seat of Christ (Romans 14:10-12). Every believer will give an account of himself, and the Lord will judge the decisions he made—including those concerning issues of conscience. This judgment does not determine salvation, which is by faith alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), but rather is the time when believers must give an account of their lives in service to Christ. Our position in Christ is the “foundation” spoken of in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15. That which we build upon the foundation can be the “gold, silver, and precious stones” of good works in Christ’s name, obedience and fruitfulness—dedicated spiritual service to glorify God and build the church. Or what we build on the foundation may be the “wood, hay and stubble” of worthless, frivolous, shallow activity with no spiritual value. The Judgment Seat of Christ will reveal this.
The gold, silver and precious stones in the lives of believers will survive God’s refining fire (v. 13), and believers will be rewarded based on those good works—how faithfully we served Christ (1 Corinthians 9:4-27), how well we obeyed the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20), how victorious we were over sin (Romans 6:1-4), how well we controlled our tongues (James 3:1-9), etc. We will have to give an account for our actions, whether they were truly indicative of our position in Christ. The fire of God’s judgment will completely burn up the “wood, hay and stubble” of the words we spoke and things we did which had no eternal value. “So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God” (Romans 14:12 ).
The second judgment is that of unbelievers who will be judged at the Great White Throne Judgment (Revelation 20:11-15). This judgment does not determine salvation, either. Everyone at the Great White Throne is an unbeliever who has rejected Christ in life and is therefore already doomed to the lake of fire. Revelation 20:12 says that unbelievers will be “judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.” Those who have rejected Christ as Lord and Savior will be judged based on their works alone, and because the Bible tells us that “by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified” (Galatians 2:16), they will be condemned. No amount of good works and the keeping of God’s laws can be sufficient to atone for sin. All their thoughts, words and actions will be judged against God’s perfect standard and found wanting. There will be no reward for them, only eternal condemnation and punishment.
I see you're still stuck on the condition we are born in. Check into being born again. It's a life changer.
So being a born again christian means you get to escape final judgement and get whisked away to heaven instantly upon ones mortal death?
what version of BIble do you and hawkeye read?
2 Corinthians 5:10-12 (AKJV) For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
Believers have their names written in the Book of Life. They will sit at the Judgement Throne of Christ and their sins will be presented to them, but they will live. John 3:16 For those who believe in Him will not be condemned.
. There are two separate judgments. Believers are judged at the Judgment Seat of Christ (Romans 14:10-12). Every believer will give an account of himself, and the Lord will judge the decisions he made—including those concerning issues of conscience. This judgment does not determine salvation, which is by faith alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), but rather is the time when believers must give an account of their lives in service to Christ. Our position in Christ is the “foundation” spoken of in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15. That which we build upon the foundation can be the “gold, silver, and precious stones” of good works in Christ’s name, obedience and fruitfulness—dedicated spiritual service to glorify God and build the church. Or what we build on the foundation may be the “wood, hay and stubble” of worthless, frivolous, shallow activity with no spiritual value. The Judgment Seat of Christ will reveal this.
The gold, silver and precious stones in the lives of believers will survive God’s refining fire (v. 13), and believers will be rewarded based on those good works—how faithfully we served Christ (1 Corinthians 9:4-27), how well we obeyed the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20), how victorious we were over sin (Romans 6:1-4), how well we controlled our tongues (James 3:1-9), etc. We will have to give an account for our actions, whether they were truly indicative of our position in Christ. The fire of God’s judgment will completely burn up the “wood, hay and stubble” of the words we spoke and things we did which had no eternal value. “So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God” (Romans 14:12 ).
The second judgment is that of unbelievers who will be judged at the Great White Throne Judgment (Revelation 20:11-15). This judgment does not determine salvation, either. Everyone at the Great White Throne is an unbeliever who has rejected Christ in life and is therefore already doomed to the lake of fire. Revelation 20:12 says that unbelievers will be “judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.” Those who have rejected Christ as Lord and Savior will be judged based on their works alone, and because the Bible tells us that “by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified” (Galatians 2:16), they will be condemned. No amount of good works and the keeping of God’s laws can be sufficient to atone for sin. All their thoughts, words and actions will be judged against God’s perfect standard and found wanting. There will be no reward for them, only eternal condemnation and punishment.
Except you have no good evidence for any of this.
A plummer with a hunting rifle, and a cowboy with a pickup truck. Those are the forces that made a positive difference on this tragic day.
Evidence would allow those with no faith to believe and be saved, which would negate His word, have faith as a little child and be saved. He doesnt want those who depend on proof. If proof were given, all would believe and no faith in His word would be required. Lean onto your own understanding though you know not the number of hairs on your head and in a thousand lifetimes could never create one of them.
Evidence is for the flesh, which rots, and not of the spirit, which lives forever. You too were given a spirit, which you denied for the flesh. Bad choice.
Maybe "M4" needs to be defined.(Are you talking M4 generic term for a 16 inch barrelled AR carbine type or U.S. Property M4?) and so on. Lots of terms floating around these days.
In my opinion, the term M-4 is merely a configuration.
Beyond that, there are many M-4 carbines that made their way to civilian markets years ago. They are perfectly legal.. In fact, I bought one years ago. It has a U.S. serial number and military acceptance marks.
I recently put a new upper on it and did my paint thingy on it yo camo it, added an ACE stock. But the lower is indeed a military item that is now privately and legally owned.
The US military acceptance stamp on it.
Okay. To me M4 is full auto capable and was military or somehow got out from Colt to the civilian side before the ban under Reagan for manufacture. And there are very few of those around in civilian hands (as M4. There are a good number of AR-15's and M16 types around.).
But for one poster to say that most are not legally owned is interesting.
I guess I failed at trying to make my point. What I was alluding to was the poster being worried about those who go out now and acquire M4's. I was trying to make the point that M4's were acquired years back by, so worrying about them being acquired now is to no effect. In other words, it's to late to worry.
. There are two separate judgments. Believers are judged at the Judgment Seat of Christ (Romans 14:10-12)..... This judgment does not determine salvation, which is by faith alone...
Hawkeye has no possible way of positively determining that any or all those particular church goers exhibited the required faith. that is only known by their God....to claim that any transgressors act of physically attending a church is proof positive that they have the required faith for entry into heaven, is nothing but absurd wishful thinking.
Evidence would allow those with no faith to believe and be saved, which would negate His word, have faith as a little child and be saved. He doesnt want those who depend on proof. If proof were given, all would believe and no faith in His word would be required. Lean onto your own understanding though you know not the number of hairs on your head and in a thousand lifetimes could never create one of them.
Evidence is for the flesh, which rots, and not of the spirit, which lives forever. You too were given a spirit, which you denied for the flesh. Bad choice.
Did Satan know without question that God existed but still reject him?
And God didn't honor the free will of Pharaoh when he continuously hardened his heart when Pharaoh was willing to let the Moses and his people go. Of course there's no archaeological evidence for the Exodus, and the scholarly consensus is that Moses is a fictional character.
However, regardless of personal philosophies, this is a time for our sympathies to be with the families and community of the victims.
You scare the Lord, bro. No, satan wanted to sucker your ass and defy Gods blessing for you.
Ah yes, Satan, that figure borrowed for Zoroastrianism, with whom God mades bets and gives permission to kill people all for the purpose of buggering with old Job.
The book of Job is actually quit relevant to these recent events. Through no fault of their own, the fickle variance of the universe visited great tragedy and misfortune upon this small community. Now they must rebuild. All they can do is their best.
I'm sure someone has already preached this sermon but I'm continually amazed at how shocked people can be about violent acts against the Christian church. SHOCKED that anyone could commit murder inside a place of worship, SHOCKED that innocent worshippers would have evil visited upon them, SHOCKED that all of a sudden we must now arm ourselves. Get a grip folks. We were told this around 2000 years ago by the Man himself.
And He said to them,“When I sent you without money bag, knapsack, and sandals, did you lack anything?” So they said, “Nothing.”"
"Then He said to them,“But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it,and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one."
A warning to all and he didn't say leave your sword at the church house door. And He wasn't speaking just to his current disciples, but all those to come. Almost like he knew what he was talking about.
Christians especially, at all times be armed. It's Biblical.
Even when Christ admonished Peter in the garden for slicing the ear off the one of the people there to arrest Him, He merely told Peter to put his sword away because Christ's arrest was part of God's plan. He DID NOT forbid him to carry it, nor forbid defensive use of it in the future.
I was thinking the biggest change we have seen in society is the constant barrage of 24 hours news cycle. I think this plays a roll in the mass shootings. It may give these killers a sense of 15 minutes of fame. They go through life as a nobody and if they commit these heinous crimes their name is plastered all over the country.
The media and the liberals are wringing their hands and shouting "Now we have to do something about these shootings!" And they keep pointing at guns and gun laws, and law-abiding gun owners and demanding that Congress do something.
Food for thought: Our society has now raised an entire generation of young men addicted to violent video games, where the object is to shoot or kill as many animations as possible, as fast as possible. How many mentally unstable youths fantasize about shooting real people with real guns, just like in their video games where they shoot "people" like targets in shooting galleries? And perhaps fantasize about really being noticed by the world for the first time in their lives? "Can you see me now?"
Add in the violent movies with constant exaggerated shoot-em-up scenarios that desensitize youth to the idea of violence and killing.
Let's make Hollywood and the violent video game industry take some blame for the increases in mass shootings. If Congress "has to do something about these shootings" then let them turn their attention to some of these bad influences that have been slowly but surely corroding the fabric of our society.
I was thinking the biggest change we have seen in society is the constant barrage of 24 hours news cycle. I think this plays a roll in the mass shootings. It may give these killers a sense of 15 minutes of fame. They go through life as a nobody and if they commit these heinous crimes their name is plastered all over the country.
The media and the liberals are wringing their hands and shouting "Now we have to do something about these shootings!" And they keep pointing at guns and gun laws, and law-abiding gun owners and demanding that Congress do something.
Food for thought: Our society has now raised an entire generation of young men addicted to violent video games, where the object is to shoot or kill as many animations as possible, as fast as possible. How many mentally unstable youths fantasize about shooting real people with real guns, just like in their video games where they shoot "people" like targets in shooting galleries? And perhaps fantasize about really being noticed by the world for the first time in their lives? "Can you see me now?"
Add in the violent movies with constant exaggerated shoot-em-up scenarios that desensitize youth to the idea of violence and killing.
Let's make Hollywood and the violent video game industry take some blame for the increases in mass shootings. If Congress "has to do something about these shootings" then let them turn their attention to some of these bad influences that have been slowly but surely corroding the fabric of our society.
I was thinking the biggest change we have seen in society is the constant barrage of 24 hours news cycle. I think this plays a roll in the mass shootings. It may give these killers a sense of 15 minutes of fame. They go through life as a nobody and if they commit these heinous crimes their name is plastered all over the country.
The media and the liberals are wringing their hands and shouting "Now we have to do something about these shootings!" And they keep pointing at guns and gun laws, and law-abiding gun owners and demanding that Congress do something.
Food for thought: Our society has now raised an entire generation of young men addicted to violent video games, where the object is to shoot or kill as many animations as possible, as fast as possible. How many mentally unstable youths fantasize about shooting real people with real guns, just like in their video games where they shoot "people" like targets in shooting galleries? And perhaps fantasize about really being noticed by the world for the first time in their lives? "Can you see me now?"
Add in the violent movies with constant exaggerated shoot-em-up scenarios that desensitize youth to the idea of violence and killing.
Let's make Hollywood and the violent video game industry take some blame for the increases in mass shootings. If Congress "has to do something about these shootings" then let them turn their attention to some of these bad influences that have been slowly but surely corroding the fabric of our society.
Let's not. If they can be swayed that easily, then blame thier parents for thier raising. Next you will blame the gun for looking cool and deadly. Stop blaming tools and influence, and blame the one who did the deed. No gun has ever broken out of a safe, armed itself, and started stalking people. No movie did either. No game loaded a magazine, or pulled a charging handle. If the child has no values, blame the parents. That is thier job. Don't look for bad influences, media, peer pressure, look in the mirror and own it.
I was thinking the biggest change we have seen in society is the constant barrage of 24 hours news cycle. I think this plays a roll in the mass shootings. It may give these killers a sense of 15 minutes of fame. They go through life as a nobody and if they commit these heinous crimes their name is plastered all over the country.
The media and the liberals are wringing their hands and shouting "Now we have to do something about these shootings!" And they keep pointing at guns and gun laws, and law-abiding gun owners and demanding that Congress do something.
Food for thought: Our society has now raised an entire generation of young men addicted to violent video games, where the object is to shoot or kill as many animations as possible, as fast as possible. How many mentally unstable youths fantasize about shooting real people with real guns, just like in their video games where they shoot "people" like targets in shooting galleries? And perhaps fantasize about really being noticed by the world for the first time in their lives? "Can you see me now?"
Add in the violent movies with constant exaggerated shoot-em-up scenarios that desensitize youth to the idea of violence and killing.
Let's make Hollywood and the violent video game industry take some blame for the increases in mass shootings. If Congress "has to do something about these shootings" then let them turn their attention to some of these bad influences that have been slowly but surely corroding the fabric of our society.
I think that's called subliminal programing. It certainly works in the education system. Do they have to bad parenting to become violent or can they be influenced.
You're just making up hypotheticals to support your position. Do you have reason to believe any of the people killed Sunday in that church fit that description?
The 26 victims like the shooter, the mafia , Adolf Hitler, etc, etc, are all born sinner -transgressors.
In that they are all equal...and must face the final judgement. explain, How did those 26 victims get ahead of everybody else and get transported instantly to heaven? What authority confirmed to you they don't need to face the final judgement first?
I see you're still stuck on the condition we are born in. Check into being born again. It's a life changer.
So being a born again christian means you get to escape final judgement and get whisked away to heaven instantly upon ones mortal death?
what version of BIble do you and hawkeye read?
2 Corinthians 5:10-12 (AKJV) 'For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad'.
How long have you been caught up in the Seventh Day Adventist error? Or are you a JW? Those are the only two "Christian" organizations who teach soul sleep.
How could this thread deteriorate into yet another religious debacle?
Perhaps take that crap somewhere else?
Are you referring to the discussions about the legal minutia regarding the obligation to report military crimes and what constitutes a felony for the purpose of prohibiting gun sale, etc.? Yeah, I agree.
Evidence would allow those with no faith to believe and be saved, which would negate His word, have faith as a little child and be saved. He doesnt want those who depend on proof. If proof were given, all would believe and no faith in His word would be required. Lean onto your own understanding though you know not the number of hairs on your head and in a thousand lifetimes could never create one of them.
Evidence is for the flesh, which rots, and not of the spirit, which lives forever. You too were given a spirit, which you denied for the flesh. Bad choice.
Jesus said that unbelievers wouldn't believe even if someone rose from the dead in front of them and told them, so no amount of evidence turns an unbeliever into a believer.
Hawkeye has no possible way of positively determining that any or all those particular church goers exhibited the required faith. that is only known by their God....to claim that any transgressors act of physically attending a church is proof positive that they have the required faith for entry into heaven, is nothing but absurd wishful thinking.
I simply take Christ at his word regarding those who are killed for his sake. They were attesting to their faith by being in attendance when they were killed for Christ's sake. I don't presume to questions their motives for attending Christian worship.
Jesus said that unbelievers wouldn't believe even if someone rose from the dead in front of them and told them, so no amount of evidence turns an unbeliever into a believer.
He probably said '[bleep] off and annoy someone else" as well, but you don't have to beat it to death.
My sympathies to those in the church, and my appreciation to those that put a stop to it.
"Court documents obtained by KUSA-TV Kyle Clark show that he was charged with animal cruelty in 2014 in Colorado. A witness to the incident, Jennifer Jones, told authorities that Kelley was seen chasing after a Husky that was running away from him near the rear of his RV. After catching it, she said that Kelley threw it to the ground and “started beating on the dog with both fists, punching it in the head and chest.”
As Kelley was striking the dog, witnesses said they could hear it “yelping and whining,” and Kelley picked the animal up by the neck and threw it onto the ground, dragging him away, witnesses said."
Yep there’s people I wish weren’t allowed to drive, have babies, or drink, leave alone have a gun
Freedoms never been free
That and add voting to the list.
Because I'm willing to accept the responsibility required to live in a free country I'll accept the azzhats as the price of admission. I'm much more afraid of the government that is there to help me than fellow citizens with M4's.
How could this thread deteriorate into yet another religious debacle?
Perhaps take that crap somewhere else?
A church was shot up, so religion was bound to become part of the conversation. There are some militant atheists who automatically go on the attack anytime religion is mentioned.
This thread going that direction was just as guaranteed as Christians being persecuted and martyred for their faith.
How could this thread deteriorate into yet another religious debacle?
Perhaps take that crap somewhere else?
A church was shot up, so religion was bound to become part of the conversation. There are some militant atheists who automatically go on the attack anytime religion is mentioned.
This thread going that direction was just as guaranteed as Christians being persecuted and martyred for their faith.
Exactly. I believe it was TRH who said he didn't go for all the parsing of gun laws pertaining to this either. It was also predestined that it would be discussed. I'll agree with Hawkeye. It sure seems that there are at least three items on the 4473 that would have excluded this villain from his purchase regardless of what the government said on his call-in background check. The problem is we shouldn't even have a 4473 or FFL's in the first place as all that is infringement.
We can look for places to put the blame...lack of mental healthcare, influence of the schools, bad parenting, the MSM, etc. The sad fact is, the human condition is such that there are many capable of such acts and in the end, only the actor is responsible for his/her actions. As our President said, thanks be to the two who put an end to his depredations before more folks were victimized.
While I agree that this attack is an attack on Christianity, I'm kinda tired of the theological debates that run page after page of people interjecting their own theology.
There are members here that scoff at Christians and attack Christianity as well.
While I agree that this attack is an attack on Christianity, I'm kinda tired of the theological debates that run page after page of people interjecting their own theology.
There are members here that scoff at Christians and attack Christianity as well.
When I get tired of something but it's in a thread I'm otherwise interested in, I just skip the post. Just a thought...There are members here that I don't dislike, but who post stuff always that I'm uninterested in. I skip their posts. There are some who are good folks but just uninteresting reads.
After reading the link about the guy who stopped him, it sounds like Kelley never entered the church at all. He was shot next to his car in the parking lot then drove off. He had to have fired a LOT of rounds through the walls to hit that many people blindly.
I guess I failed at trying to make my point. What I was alluding to was the poster being worried about those who go out now and acquire M4's. I was trying to make the point that M4's were acquired years back by, so worrying about them being acquired now is to no effect. In other words, it's to late to worry.
Thanks. I understand your point now. And, barring a door to door confiscation it's probably a little late.
Does anyone know if the church had a no-guns policy? Was anyone packing?
Someone said that he started shooting from the exterior, through the walls. Haven't heard confirmation of this yet.
That was me, I saw an interview on one of the stations Sunday evening with the grandmother of some of the victims, she said she had talked with some of the survivors about this horrible event. They had told her that the he had gone to the side of the building and shot through the wall before coming to the front door to pick off survivors, supposedly he was interrupted by the neighbor shortly after getting to the front door. How accurate was the grandmothers second hand account remains to be confirmed, but I remember seeing footage later that looked like there were holes in the exterior wall.
Dressed all in black and wearing tactical gear and a ballistic vest, Kelley first began firing outside the church at around 11:20 a.m. local time (12:20 p.m. ET) before he continued his shooting spree inside, said Freeman Martin, a regional director with the Texas Department of Public Safety. He was armed with a "Ruger AR assault-type rifle," Martin said.
While I agree that this attack is an attack on Christianity, I'm kinda tired of the theological debates that run page after page of people interjecting their own theology.
There are members here that scoff at Christians and attack Christianity as well.
It it an attack on the movie cult when the mass shooting is in a theater? Devin Roof was not attacking christianity when he killed 8(?) in the Carolina church. Was it an attack on country music in Vegas last month?
I don't know what this [bleep] was attacking, but it seems more likely that he was trying to take down his mother-in-law and anyone in vicinity, except she was skipping church that morning.
Does anyone know if the church had a no-guns policy? Was anyone packing?
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe I read earlier in this thread that Churches are one of several places the state of Texas doesn't allow concealed carry. So in short, there doesn't need to be a church policy, as it's a state law.
I don't know much about anything. Just a guy that posts on an Internet forum occasionally, but something just doesn't seem to be right with all these mass shootings. Start with Gabriel Gifford and move forward to this recent church shooting. All the shots fired in a short length of time. Where and how did the shooter carry all that ammo? Magazines were obviously pre loaded so the event had to have been planned. Did they buy the ammo all at once or over a period of time? Think of the noise inside a building or motel room. Outside it would sound like pop,pop,pop but inside would be deafening. Think how hot the gun would get after 430 rounds. How long would it take to fire that may rounds from a semi-auto firearm? Las Vegas shooter had multiple firearms so he could switch when they get hot or jam. Is an AR more likely to jam as it heats up? They seem to be getting better at identifying soft targets and large groups of people. Planning is more sophisticated. Do you plan this for months and start collecting guns, ammo and magazines? And in almost every case the shooter dies!
The one thing these white male scumsucking shooters have in common is that they identify as democrats or at the very least HATE Republicans. The political discourse has devolved into a polarized assumption that the other side doesn’t just disagree but they want to kill you and fundamentally threaten your family, friends and homosexual lovers. That’s how they justify killing innocent men, women and children.
This past year has led me to believe that another civil war is imminent. The left cannot coexist with anyone that does not accept their dogma.
I don't know much about anything. Just a guy that posts on an Internet forum occasionally, but something just doesn't seem to be right with all these mass shootings. Start with Gabriel Gifford and move forward to this recent church shooting. All the shots fired in a short length of time. Where and how did the shooter carry all that ammo? Magazines were obviously pre loaded so the event had to have been planned. Did they buy the ammo all at once or over a period of time? Think of the noise inside a building or motel room. Outside it would sound like pop,pop,pop but inside would be deafening. Think how hot the gun would get after 430 rounds. How long would it take to fire that may rounds from a semi-auto firearm? Las Vegas shooter had multiple firearms so he could switch when they get hot or jam. Is an AR more likely to jam as it heats up? They seem to be getting better at identifying soft targets and large groups of people. Planning is more sophisticated. Do you plan this for months and start collecting guns, ammo and magazines? And in almost every case the shooter dies!
Odd that such a high percentage of them seem to reflexively off themselves before getting caught, thus negating an investigation and trial.
The one thing these white male scumsucking shooters have in common is that they identify as democrats or at the very least HATE Republicans. The political discourse has devolved into a polarized assumption that the other side doesn’t just disagree but they want to kill you and fundamentally threaten your family, friends and homosexual lovers. That’s how they justify killing innocent men, women and children.
REALLY? Timothy McVeigh was a democrat? I didn't know that. Dillon Roof too? And now this guy and the Vegas shooter? Wow, I didn't realize that.
given that I don't have any homosexual lovers, I guess I don't have to worry about some this, but you do?
I think you just want to rant and do a little more fear mongering and sell some more hate. Your dogma is as bad as theirs.
Leroy, There’s a lot you don’t know, you make that abundantly clear each time you scribble out a response. Spend more time reading and less time flailing your cockbeaters. 😉
Leroy, There’s a lot you don’t know, you make that abundantly clear each time you scribble out a response. Spend more time reading and less time flailing your cockbeaters. 😉
I do seem to get under your skin. As you usual, you just make things up to fit your story line.
I don’t recall ever conversing with you before but maybe I have, in any case you don’t get under my skin anymore than myriad of idiots that one meets and forgets on life’s trail, just like a good crap you move on and forget about it. 😉
Anyway I wish you no malice and hope your week has started out well.
I don’t recall ever conversing with you before but maybe I have, in any case you don’t get under my skin anymore than myriad of idiots that one meets and forgets on life’s trail, just like a good crap you move on and forget about it. 😉
Anyway I wish you no malice and hope your week has started out well.
While I agree that this attack is an attack on Christianity, I'm kinda tired of the theological debates that run page after page of people interjecting their own theology.
There are members here that scoff at Christians and attack Christianity as well.
It it an attack on the movie cult when the mass shooting is in a theater? Devin Roof was not attacking christianity when he killed 8(?) in the Carolina church. Was it an attack on country music in Vegas last month?
I don't know what this [bleep] was attacking, but it seems more likely that he was trying to take down his mother-in-law and anyone in vicinity, except she was skipping church that morning.
I believe the guy's name was Dylann Roof. But, yes, that was another attack on Christians by evil.
I'm also convinced that the Las Vegas shooting was an attack on conservatism. As was the shooting of the Republicans practicing baseball outside D.C. a few months ago.
If you are trying to make a point, you made it very well. Evil and liberals (Most often the same actor) attack Christianity and Conservatives.
I may be slow on this, released by local Texas news.
“The gunman in the worst mass killing in Texas history escaped from a mental health institution in New Mexico, threatened his Air Force chain of command while facing military charges of domestic violence, and “had already been caught sneaking firearms onto” an air base, according to a 2012 El Paso Police Department report obtained by WFAA.”
I don't know about the rest of y'all, but this one seems the most likely to have occurred just about the way it was purported to. IOW it seems like a legit spontaneous attack by a deranged individual.
With all this calling for rabble-rousing and violence by the left's golden warriors HRC, Barack Hussein, Pelosi, Feinstein, Schumer, why should we be surprised when some feeble minded pea brain decides he wants to torch himself at the cost of 27 other people?
The demturds should be horse whipped for this constant call to violence. In the 8 years prior, any layman making these kinds of statemen's would have been placed in a Hussein gulag.
Meanwhile, all these demturds live in Ivory walled palaces with armies of heavily armed bodyguards. The epitome of hypocrisy.
With all this calling for rabble-rousing and violence by the left's golden warriors HRC, Barack Hussein, Pelosi, Feinstein, Schumer, why should we be surprised when some feeble minded pea brain decides he wants to torch himself at the cost of 27 other people?
The demturds should be horse whipped for this constant call to violence. In the 8 years prior, any layman making these kinds of statemen's would have been placed in a Hussein gulag.
Meanwhile, all these demturds live in Ivory walled palaces with armies of heavily armed bodyguards. The epitome of hypocrisy.
Does anyone know if the church had a no-guns policy? Was anyone packing?
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I believe I read earlier in this thread that Churches are one of several places the state of Texas doesn't allow concealed carry. So in short, there doesn't need to be a church policy, as it's a state law.
Scott, it's legal to carry at a Church in TX, unless the Church posts a 30-06 sign. Basically, it's the only Legal sign recognized by the State of TX for Concealed Carry. Also, the Pastor or Priest may give the parishioners or members a verbal warning to legally prevent Concealed Carry in that Church.
In some states, a business or Church can post a simple sign that says : No Guns, or a picture of a handgun with the red X and that is a legal sign.
But in Texas only the official 30.06 sign is Legal to prevent those with Concealed Carry License from carrying a handgun on the premises. And it must be printed in one inch block letters, with contrasting colors, in both English and Spanish, and must be clearly posted at the entrance of the building. And we also have a 30.07 sign to prevent those License Holders from entering the premises while open carrying of a handgun.
3) “Written communication” means: (A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: “Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by license holder with a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (handgun licensing law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun”; or (B) a sign posted on the property that: (i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish; (ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and (iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.
Even should 30.06/30.07 signage not precisely comply (as per above specs.) for it to be considered technically legal signage, a judge & jury could still rule in favor of the property owner.
For a carry person to say,technically argue the lettering was only 7/8" instead of minimum 1" high, or not contrasting enough, or the sign not placed conspicuously enough, etc ....result would likely depend on what a court deems that any 'reasonable' person of common intelligence would take to understand as to the expressed intent & purposeful effect of the signage in question.
The statute does not set or specify a minimum level of color contrast or conspicuousness. hence its likely to hinge on what: 'a reasonable person of reasonable awareness and intelligence' would make of the signage.
If a carry person noticed and understood the sign , but then ignored it because he found the lettering to be technically somewhat smaller than the legal minimum 1" height, ...well good luck with that defence...
You really are a Dumb Ass! If the sign was not a Legal sign, as specified in the Statue in the Texas Penal Code, than the License Holder could not be charged. Even if arrested, the DA would have to drop the charge. So it would never make it to a judge or a Jury. AND, if you read the complete version of the Law, according to the Texas Penal Code Statue, it clearly states that the License Holder cannot be charged if he leaves the premises if confronted by the Owner or Manager of the property. The License Holder may only be charged if confronted, and failed to leave the premises.
Maybe you ought to stick to giving legal advise to some of your liberal antafi butt buddies. And pull your head out of your ass. You'll feel so much better when you finally here that big popping noise!
The License Holder may only be charged if confronted, and failed to leave the premises.
Wrong.
By ignoring a sign , one can be charged with a class C misdemeanour. refusing to leave when asked,would be a class A misdemeanour.
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
If the sign was not a Legal sign, as specified in the Statue in the Texas Penal Code, than the License Holder could not be charged.
Of course a L/H can be charged, it can then take a courtroom to determine if the charges are valid. and to decide whether the 30.06/07 signage met the statute conditions of color contrast, conspicuousness, etc, etc.
but one should note-
'contrasting colors' (a term not defined by Texas appellate or higher courts),
'1” block lettering' (no Texas appellate or higher courts have addressed what happens if it is .99” or less)
'Both in English and Spanish' (no Texas appellate or higher courts have addressed how exact the Spanish translation must be).
'conspicuously' (undefined and not addressed by Texas appellate or higher courts),
Quote
If the sign was not a Legal sign, as specified in the Statue in the Texas Penal Code,
Ok , please tell , how much color contrast and how much conspicousness is required at minimum to make it a 'legal' sign? Since both are not defined in the statute or by subsequent case law, the owner could argue it met the statute conditions of color contrast and conspicuous display, and you as the defendant argue the opposite,....so; 1/ who is correct? 2/ what standard/measure does a court use to decide? 3/ if the court is to set precedent by establishing a std/measure to allow adjudication, what method or reasoning do they apply to achieve such?
Quote
Even if arrested, the DA would have to drop the charge.
DA could let the charge/s stand, that a court may then attempt to iron out the ambiguities in the statute concerning signage.
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Maybe you ought to stick to giving legal advise to.....
In NV signs do not have force of law. If the property owner asks you to check your gun, or leave, he has that right. If you do not leave you will be charged with trespass.
The License Holder may only be charged if confronted, and failed to leave the premises.
Wrong.
By ignoring a sign , one can be charged with a class C misdemeanour. refusing to leave when asked,would be a class A misdemeanour.
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
If the sign was not a Legal sign, as specified in the Statue in the Texas Penal Code, than the License Holder could not be charged.
Of course a L/H can be charged, it can then take a courtroom to determine if the charges are valid. and to decide whether the 30.06/07 signage met the statute conditions of color contrast, conspicuousness, etc, etc.
but one should note-
'contrasting colors' (a term not defined by Texas appellate or higher courts),
'1” block lettering' (no Texas appellate or higher courts have addressed what happens if it is .99” or less)
'Both in English and Spanish' (no Texas appellate or higher courts have addressed how exact the Spanish translation must be).
'conspicuously' (undefined and not addressed by Texas appellate or higher courts),
Quote
If the sign was not a Legal sign, as specified in the Statue in the Texas Penal Code,
Ok , please tell , how much color contrast and how much conspicousness is required at minimum to make it a 'legal' sign? Since both are not defined in the statute or by subsequent case law, the owner could argue it met the statute conditions of color contrast and conspicuous display, and you as the defendant argue the opposite,....so; 1/ who is correct? 2/ what standard/measure does a court use to decide? 3/ if the court is to set precedent by establishing a std/measure to allow adjudication, what method or reasoning do they apply to achieve such?
Quote
Even if arrested, the DA would have to drop the charge.
DA could let the charge/s stand, that a court may then attempt to iron out the ambiguities in the statute concerning signage.
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Maybe you ought to stick to giving legal advise to.....
No legal advice was issued by me.
Once again, you've proved your an idiot! Only a Libertard Lawyer could take a simple statue from the TX Penal Code, and twist it into a cluster FUGG! And debate the definition of Contrasing Colors. And only a Leftist Obama loving POS could misconstrue the Spanish translation. And lastly, in a court case, where a License Holder was prosecuted for trespass with a concealed weapon. the premise owner would not be involved. Only the prosecuting Attourney, the Defense Attourney, defendant, and the arresting officer would be testifying.
But since you probably graduated from dipschitt U, and only represent child molesters and chase personal injury scammers, you must have missed that day in Penal Law 101.
So why don't you take your pansy ass left leaning goat fuggin muzzy loving libertard views some place else where you won't get your tiny little nuts in a vise over a law that you are obviously too stupid to understand, much less debate.
And why don't you leave the discussions here on the Campfire to real American Patriots. No one here gives a damn about your libertard cock sucking opinions anyway!
The License Holder may only be charged if confronted, and failed to leave the premises.
Wrong.
By ignoring a sign , one can be charged with a class C misdemeanour. refusing to leave when asked,would be a class A misdemeanour.
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
If the sign was not a Legal sign, as specified in the Statue in the Texas Penal Code, than the License Holder could not be charged.
Of course a L/H can be charged, it can then take a courtroom to determine if the charges are valid. and to decide whether the 30.06/07 signage met the statute conditions of color contrast, conspicuousness, etc, etc.
but one should note-
'contrasting colors' (a term not defined by Texas appellate or higher courts),
'1” block lettering' (no Texas appellate or higher courts have addressed what happens if it is .99” or less)
'Both in English and Spanish' (no Texas appellate or higher courts have addressed how exact the Spanish translation must be).
'conspicuously' (undefined and not addressed by Texas appellate or higher courts),
Quote
If the sign was not a Legal sign, as specified in the Statue in the Texas Penal Code,
Ok , please tell , how much color contrast and how much conspicousness is required at minimum to make it a 'legal' sign? Since both are not defined in the statute or by subsequent case law, the owner could argue it met the statute conditions of color contrast and conspicuous display, and you as the defendant argue the opposite,....so; 1/ who is correct? 2/ what standard/measure does a court use to decide? 3/ if the court is to set precedent by establishing a std/measure to allow adjudication, what method or reasoning do they apply to achieve such?
Quote
Even if arrested, the DA would have to drop the charge.
DA could let the charge/s stand, that a court may then attempt to iron out the ambiguities in the statute concerning signage.
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Maybe you ought to stick to giving legal advise to.....
No legal advice was issued by me.
Once again, you've proved your an idiot! Only a Libertard Lawyer could take a simple statue from the TX Penal Code, and twist it into a cluster FUGG! And debate the definition of Contrasing Colors. And only a Leftist Obama loving POS could misconstrue the Spanish translation. And lastly, in a court case, where a License Holder was prosecuted for trespass with a concealed weapon. the premise owner would not be involved. Only the prosecuting Attourney, the Defense Attourney, defendant, and the arresting officer would be testifying.
But since you probably graduated from dipschitt U, and only represent child molesters and chase personal injury scammers, you must have missed that day in Penal Law 101.
So why don't you take your pansy ass left leaning goat fuggin muzzy loving libertard views some place else where you won't get your tiny little nuts in a vise over a law that you are obviously too stupid to understand, much less debate.
And why don't you leave the discussions here on the Campfire to real American Patriots. No one here gives a damn about your libertard cock sucking opinions anyway!
I am worried about you. I think you need to tell him what you really think of him and no holding back any more.
But in Texas only the official 30.06 sign is Legal to prevent those with Concealed Carry License from carrying a handgun on the premises. And it must be printed in one inch block letters, with contrasting colors in both English and Spanish, and must be clearly posted at the entrance of the building. .
So contrasting colors you at first deem as vitally important to the technical legality of signage.. then you contradict yourself and say that questioning signage contrast in a courtroom would be just twisting things...LOL
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
Only a Libertard Lawyer could take a simple statue from the TX Penal Code, and twist it into a cluster FUGG! And debate the definition of Contrasing Colors.!
If you are a defendant on a class C misdemeanour charge arguing the sign is 'illegal', if you don't argue any or all those technical points of; color contrast , letter size, conspicuous display, etc,, then what do you use from the statute to argue your defence that the signage was non -compliant?
-How much contrast is required between colors to make signage compliant? -How conspicuously placed does signage need to be, for it to be compliant?
If you don't question such technical compliance requirements from the statute, that means you are prepared to accept that signage can have a wide undefined variance and still be compliant, hence counter to your defence that a 30.06 sign was technically illegal.
Originally Posted by chlinstructor
And lastly, in a court case, where a License Holder was prosecuted for trespass with a concealed weapon. the premise owner would not be involved. Only the prosecuting Attourney, the Defense Attourney, defendant, and the arresting officer would be testifying.
So your defence lawyer would not exercise the option to call the property owner to the stand if it was deemed to his clients advantage?
![[Linked Image]](https://texas.arrests.org/mugs/Guadalupe/117575.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://a67.tinypic.com/eff707.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/67/22/51/14494301/3/1024x1024.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/11/06/03/460EE99300000578-5053013-Kelley_pictured_in_his_yearbook_photo_-a-5_1509937365302.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://s244.photobucket.com/user/rockinbbar/media/20170628_151745_resized_zpsjvo8ecjl.jpg.html)
![[Linked Image]](http://s244.photobucket.com/user/rockinbbar/media/20170624_083158_resized_zpsmvyoj9tl.jpg.html)
