There were guns everywhere in that building. The shooter used his shotgun to arm himself with more weapons and ammo. He bought his shotgun in Northern VA, not in DC. however, it has to be noted that he had no conditions under which he would have been banned from owning a gun. Not even his two previous incidents where he was charged with discharging firearms warranted a flag on his name.My only question is this – did he buy his gun at a gun show, from a private owner, or from a store where he had to go through the mandatory waiting period.@ mskemple - thank you for your compassion and your very kind and appropriate words of sympathy. We need more open hearts like yours.Respectfully,C.
As long as some states are lax on gun control, it’ll be very hard for states with strict gun laws to do much. The killer yesterday came from Texas where guns are cheap and easy. But to say gun free areas are victim areas is inaccurate. Countries with strict gun control generally have very low gun death rates. Exceptions are those with extremely high poverty rates.
Despite two past incidents where he fired guns in anger, he was able to get a concealed carry license from Texas. As long as we have right-to-kill states where anyone can get a gun with no background checks, no one is safe. In any other civilized country in the world, he would not have been allowed to purchase a gun, and the criminals who sold his guns to him would be held liable for breaking the law and would be shut down. Criminals cannot get guns in countries where selling guns to criminals is not tolerated.
Speaking as someone who spent 27 years in the Navy, military bases are gun free zones. You are not allowed to carry one, have one in your vehicle, and if living in on base housing have to register any you have with the base command. Those in barracks or transient housing cannot have weapons either.At Ft. Hood the only person with a weapon was that traitor Hasan, the shooter.
The Navy yard shooter shot a trained ARMED GUARD, took HIS weapon, then shot ANOTHER ARMED PERSON, and took THAT sidearm!! So much for the “wisdom” of arming teachers in our schools!
Yes, the “problem” IS largely the fact we have more guns per capita than almost any nation on earth- in the hands of “civilians” who are NOT part of militias, or legitimate “home guards”. Even Israel has stronger restrictions on guns than we do!
While “assault weapon” is a poor descriptor, restricting magazine capacity of all centerfire weapons is NOT hard to describe! Five rounds for ANY rifle or shotgun, and 12 rounds for CIVILIAN handguns is sensible, and would limit the killing capability of the “nut” even the somewhat trained one. Very few persons can change magazines quickly enough to make smaller capacity ones as dangerous as lare capacity. This was proven in the Giffords’ incident when the shooter was taken down, by people NOT using firearms, including one guy who HAD one! when he fumbled while reloading.
Even our National Guard units have regulations that limit firearms access, requiring training, and limiting when weapons can leave an armory. Limiting, but NOT eliminating civilian access to lethal firepower is just common sense. The NRA “types” have NO common sense, and that’s what keeps Congress from making sensible changes. BTW there are only roughly 300 “gun laws” on the books, not the “thousands” the NRA would have folks believe, and many do just need to be revised, updated, and/or ENFORCED.
IF you are caught hunting birds with too many rounds in a shotgun, you WILL be cited, and stopped, by game officers. Shooting PEOPLE shouldn’t be less restrictive!
So, what you are saying is that Americans are for more insane than even those people of such areas as the Middle East, let alone such relatively sane and gun free areas as Europe?
The population of Australia is about 23 million currently. The US population is about 313 million currently or about 14 times that of Australia.So the rate is only somewhat lower. It also isn’t a good measure to compare in any case as these incidents are not really statistically comparable generally being random.
Since the one thing all of the recent US mass shootings have in common is the person involved having mental health issues that seems to be a better place to start than snatching weapons which are generally not used in improper ways.
I could support more institutionalization of the mentally ill and tighter checks on mental health when someone is purchasing a firearm. Ithink both of those things would have a significant impact on this problem.
Guns are just a tool. Remember the nutter that flew a Cessna into the Austin TX IRS building? Getting rid of guns does nothing to address the actual problem: The insane, mentally unstable, and those who are dangerous being allowed to wander free with no attempt to supervise or control them.
So we want the federal govt to handle the violence. But think about it – this guy had security clearance to get on the base. Hmm, who gives out security clearances? Then, in Boston, the Russians warned us. Hmm, I wonder who they warned – the state govt in Massachusetts? No, probably not. Oh I know, they warned the federal govt! Ok, I think I’m seeing a trend.
tigger: the “explanation” is very simple, listen closely: They’re called cars! You drive a few miles from Chicago, or D.C. to nearby places WITHOUT gun purchase regulation, buy a gun, drive back that few miles, and shoot someone with a gun sensible restrictions well might have kept out of your hands, for a potential variety of reasons, like, criminal record.
Every time you bring up Chicago, you merely prove that NATIONAL STANDARDS regarding purchase and possession is sorely needed, but Congress hasn’t got the guts to buck the NRA and their whole four million members with power WAY beyond their numbers.
And: is the guy, or gal, blowing away the 7/11 clerk for $6.80 in the register, insane? Not all killings are by insane people, in fact, very few are.
Just over the hill from me, a guy was finally arrested for murder. He shot a guy two years ago, and claimed self-defense, though the dead guy was unarmed. He just shot another neighbor to death, also unarmed, and this time, after a long history of this shooter harassing his neighbors, they arrested him, and maybe, maybe, it will stick? (BTW, claiming “self defense” again, he shot the neighbor IN THE BACK!
Yep, “let every man be armed”, what a way to make everyone, “safe”.
wolfhoundblues1 over 10 years ago
Guns are completely banned in DC. Gun free zones are victim zones.
chazandru over 10 years ago
There were guns everywhere in that building. The shooter used his shotgun to arm himself with more weapons and ammo. He bought his shotgun in Northern VA, not in DC. however, it has to be noted that he had no conditions under which he would have been banned from owning a gun. Not even his two previous incidents where he was charged with discharging firearms warranted a flag on his name.My only question is this – did he buy his gun at a gun show, from a private owner, or from a store where he had to go through the mandatory waiting period.@ mskemple - thank you for your compassion and your very kind and appropriate words of sympathy. We need more open hearts like yours.Respectfully,C.
Enoki over 10 years ago
Poor Benson stuck in a Mobius loop of surreality. More gun laws will not solve the problem of dangerous crazy people running loose in society.
cdward over 10 years ago
As long as some states are lax on gun control, it’ll be very hard for states with strict gun laws to do much. The killer yesterday came from Texas where guns are cheap and easy. But to say gun free areas are victim areas is inaccurate. Countries with strict gun control generally have very low gun death rates. Exceptions are those with extremely high poverty rates.
avarner over 10 years ago
If liberal policies worked – DC, New York and Chicago would be the safest cities in the world.
And Detroit would be the most prosperous.
ARodney over 10 years ago
Despite two past incidents where he fired guns in anger, he was able to get a concealed carry license from Texas. As long as we have right-to-kill states where anyone can get a gun with no background checks, no one is safe. In any other civilized country in the world, he would not have been allowed to purchase a gun, and the criminals who sold his guns to him would be held liable for breaking the law and would be shut down. Criminals cannot get guns in countries where selling guns to criminals is not tolerated.
Enoki over 10 years ago
Speaking as someone who spent 27 years in the Navy, military bases are gun free zones. You are not allowed to carry one, have one in your vehicle, and if living in on base housing have to register any you have with the base command. Those in barracks or transient housing cannot have weapons either.At Ft. Hood the only person with a weapon was that traitor Hasan, the shooter.
David Riedel Premium Member over 10 years ago
^ Have a nice day!
Spyderred over 10 years ago
Not true that Congress is asleep. Most are down at the bank cashing those “campaign contributions”.
Enoki over 10 years ago
Unfortunately, there have been a lot more shootings and crime in general….
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17847
What you are claiming is selective. It also ignores the Monash University shooting of October 2002 where a student killed 2 and wounded 5.
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
The Navy yard shooter shot a trained ARMED GUARD, took HIS weapon, then shot ANOTHER ARMED PERSON, and took THAT sidearm!! So much for the “wisdom” of arming teachers in our schools!
Yes, the “problem” IS largely the fact we have more guns per capita than almost any nation on earth- in the hands of “civilians” who are NOT part of militias, or legitimate “home guards”. Even Israel has stronger restrictions on guns than we do!
While “assault weapon” is a poor descriptor, restricting magazine capacity of all centerfire weapons is NOT hard to describe! Five rounds for ANY rifle or shotgun, and 12 rounds for CIVILIAN handguns is sensible, and would limit the killing capability of the “nut” even the somewhat trained one. Very few persons can change magazines quickly enough to make smaller capacity ones as dangerous as lare capacity. This was proven in the Giffords’ incident when the shooter was taken down, by people NOT using firearms, including one guy who HAD one! when he fumbled while reloading.
Even our National Guard units have regulations that limit firearms access, requiring training, and limiting when weapons can leave an armory. Limiting, but NOT eliminating civilian access to lethal firepower is just common sense. The NRA “types” have NO common sense, and that’s what keeps Congress from making sensible changes. BTW there are only roughly 300 “gun laws” on the books, not the “thousands” the NRA would have folks believe, and many do just need to be revised, updated, and/or ENFORCED.
IF you are caught hunting birds with too many rounds in a shotgun, you WILL be cited, and stopped, by game officers. Shooting PEOPLE shouldn’t be less restrictive!
frodo1008 over 10 years ago
So, what you are saying is that Americans are for more insane than even those people of such areas as the Middle East, let alone such relatively sane and gun free areas as Europe?
Enoki over 10 years ago
I hate having to do obvious research David: (I think you mean 1996 too)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monash_University_shooting
The population of Australia is about 23 million currently. The US population is about 313 million currently or about 14 times that of Australia.So the rate is only somewhat lower. It also isn’t a good measure to compare in any case as these incidents are not really statistically comparable generally being random.
Since the one thing all of the recent US mass shootings have in common is the person involved having mental health issues that seems to be a better place to start than snatching weapons which are generally not used in improper ways.
I could support more institutionalization of the mentally ill and tighter checks on mental health when someone is purchasing a firearm. Ithink both of those things would have a significant impact on this problem.
Enoki over 10 years ago
Guns are just a tool. Remember the nutter that flew a Cessna into the Austin TX IRS building? Getting rid of guns does nothing to address the actual problem: The insane, mentally unstable, and those who are dangerous being allowed to wander free with no attempt to supervise or control them.
adherent#1 over 10 years ago
Would not denying an honorably-discharged Vet his benefits constitute “lifting a finger”? Another unintended consequence of “liberal progressivism”….
SClark55 Premium Member over 10 years ago
So we want the federal govt to handle the violence. But think about it – this guy had security clearance to get on the base. Hmm, who gives out security clearances? Then, in Boston, the Russians warned us. Hmm, I wonder who they warned – the state govt in Massachusetts? No, probably not. Oh I know, they warned the federal govt! Ok, I think I’m seeing a trend.
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
tigger: the “explanation” is very simple, listen closely: They’re called cars! You drive a few miles from Chicago, or D.C. to nearby places WITHOUT gun purchase regulation, buy a gun, drive back that few miles, and shoot someone with a gun sensible restrictions well might have kept out of your hands, for a potential variety of reasons, like, criminal record.
Every time you bring up Chicago, you merely prove that NATIONAL STANDARDS regarding purchase and possession is sorely needed, but Congress hasn’t got the guts to buck the NRA and their whole four million members with power WAY beyond their numbers.
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
And: is the guy, or gal, blowing away the 7/11 clerk for $6.80 in the register, insane? Not all killings are by insane people, in fact, very few are.
Just over the hill from me, a guy was finally arrested for murder. He shot a guy two years ago, and claimed self-defense, though the dead guy was unarmed. He just shot another neighbor to death, also unarmed, and this time, after a long history of this shooter harassing his neighbors, they arrested him, and maybe, maybe, it will stick? (BTW, claiming “self defense” again, he shot the neighbor IN THE BACK!
Yep, “let every man be armed”, what a way to make everyone, “safe”.