It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Shooting with multiple fatalities at theater in Lafayette, Louisiana.

page: 25
35
<< 22  23  24    26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 09:44 AM
link   
If you want to know the real problem, here it is:


The superintendent said 75 percent of the people arrested in the first quarter for guns are already back on the street three months later. He stressed the necessity of better gun laws at the state and federal levels.


From an article about shootings in Chicago, which already has some of the strictest gun laws in the country.Source.

So the people were arrested for illegally possessing a gun but, three months later, they were back on the street. The solution is "better gun laws"??

No, the solution is harsher punishment for violators of the existing laws. If those 75% were locked up instead of slapped on the wrist and released, we might see some progress.

Before anyone can propose new laws, we need to fix the ones currently on the books so they're actually effective. One thing the NRA has always pushed for is harsher punishment for people who commit a crime while armed. They've been ignored while people claim the NRA blocks "all sensible measures."

How will passing more laws fix anything when the existing laws aren't effective? Nobody seems willing to answer that question yet we're accused of "not wanting to have the discussion."




posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Answer


See, those are the stories you never hear about... people using guns to stop an attack. It happens daily in this country but it never makes the national news so you don't know about it.


I'm not denying self defense with a gun never happens. But how can all the stories you have provided be 100% trusted? After all it is just hearsay, since the other person is dead.

If I ever personally committed murder, I'd obviously just claim they were attacking me and it was self defense... I can't be the only person in existence to realize that would be the most intelligent excuse after committing a murder. lol.



If you're referring to the fact that any private individual can buy a gun from another private individual, how would you solve that problem? Would you pass a law that says all non-dealer sales require a background check? Would a person who intends to commit a crime actually go that route instead of getting a gun from someone who won't do the background check?


Well obviously... criminals are fully aware of all existing loopholes and never hesitate to exploit them. All sales of firearms should require an FBI check and said firearms should always be required to be registered in the purchaser's name... That's just a no brainer.




Hunting and sport are not the reasons for the 2nd Amendment but I'm sure you already know that.


True... The reason for the second amendment is to protect you from invasion from the pomes. Though, I'm pretty certain those dudes aren't going to be attempting any invasions anytime soon.

edit on 25-7-2015 by Subaeruginosa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Reply to: LeatherNLace

Janet Reno (60 Minutes interview in 1994): "Waiting periods are only a step, Registration is only a step, Prohibition of firearms is the goal" - Former U.S. Attorney General. Keep in mind she worked for OUR government and not that long ago. Our government trains and funds politicians like her to do THEIR bidding. Only the ones who will do what the International Bankers want are given the positions that matter in our government. Otherwise, she would have been fired for abrogating the sovereignty of the US, and it's Constitutional infringement.

Source (below)

freedomoutpost.com...

1) Adolph Hitler: Mass murderer Adolf Hitler at a dinner talk on April 11, 1942 said:

“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country.”

....Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
-------------------

2)Josef Stalin, the sole leader of the Soviet Union from 1924 to 1953, said:

“If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves.”

....In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

3) Mao Tze Tung, communist dictator of China said:

“War can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun.”

...China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.


4) Idi Amin, president of Uganda from 1971 to 1979, said:


"I do not want to be controlled by any superpower. I myself consider myself the most powerful figure in the world, and that is why I do not let any superpower control me."


...Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.


5) Pol Pot, who created in Cambodia one of the 20th century's most brutal and radical regimes, was responsible for killing one million of his own ‘educated,’ yet unarmed citizens.


Source: www.lectlaw.com... (below)

6) In the 1700's George Mason (One of the Founding Fathers: December 11, 1725 – October 7, 1792), Referencing the ratification of the Constitution, said:

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe...To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way, to enslave them" George Mason remarked to his Virginia delegates regarding the colonies' recent experience with Britain, in which the Monarch's goal had been "to disarm the people";
Today is no different in America, with the exception that the Elites are just more patient and calculative than in 1776, as they have learned from history....clearly WE have not.


Here is another list: (Source: www.mercyseat.net...)
------------------------
PERPETRATOR GOVERNMENT DATE TARGET # MURDERED (ESTIMATED) DATE OF GUN CONTROL LAW SOURCE DOCUMENT
Ottoman Turkey
1915-1917 Armenians 1-1.5 million 1886-1911 Art. 166, Penal Code
Art. 166 Penal Code
Soviet Union*
1929-1953 Anti-Communists / Anti-Stalinists 20 million 1929 Art. 182 Penal Code
Nazi Germany** & Occupied Europe
1933-1945 Jews, Gypsies, Anti-Nazis 13 million 1928-1938 Law on Firearms & Ammunition, April 12 Weapons Law, March 18
China*
1949-1952 1957-1960 1966-1976 Anti- Communists Rural Populations Pro-Reform Grou 20 million 1935-1957 Arts. 186-7, Penal Code Art. 9, Security Law, Oct. 22
Guatemala
1960-1981 Maya Indians 100,000 1871-1964 Decree 36, Nov 25 Decree 283, Oct 27
Uganda
1971-1979 Christians Political Rivals 300,000 1955-1970 Firearms Ordinance Firearms Act
Cambodia
1975-1979 Educated Persons 1 million 1956 Arts. 322-8, Penal Code


www.youtube.com...


As far as 3/4 of the nation states agreeing to this? It's well on it's way, and as far as Congress is concerned. Obama has already stated that Congress is nothing more than "Ceremonial" at this point, and he has bypassed Congress several times already to push through tyrannical policies such as the NDAA.

(Source: mrconservative.com...)

"Just a few weeks ago Obama quietly used executive action—one of his new favorite pastimes—that has got gun owner’s feathers in a ruffle. According to Obama’s newest unconstitutionally enacted law, healthcare professionals are now required to violate HIPPA privacy laws and submit medical data to the government. The illegally obtained data is then used as justification for gun confiscation by the federal government.
Showing exactly the kind of man Obama is, and not having been able to pass these gun control laws through congress, Obama has unconstitutionally used executive actions to pass the laws he wasn’t able to through legal means.
In what some are interpreting to be a much bigger and devious than it seems,—a tip of the iceberg type deal—the government is mandating healthcare professionals disregard their oaths and state law. The government has mandated that patient’s medical data be submitted to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
After which the government will sort through and analyze those not fit to own a weapon (i.e. those who were “involuntarily committed to inpatient or outpatient facilities”). Basically the government is starting out slowly and testing the water to see how the public will react to not only gun confiscation but a governmental invasion of legally protected privacy.
As we are supposed to be protected by the 2nd and 4th amendments, it appears that Obama is overstepping his bound—yet again. After all, our forefathers clearly wrote that our right to bear arms, “shall not be infringed,” and, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated."

Source: Congressman walks out on Obama speech disgusted by what he was saying about bypassing Congress and breaking his sworn oath to America

Obama said : “act on his own,” without Congress and promised to “break his oath of office and begin enacting his own brand of law through executive decree… This is a wholesale violation of his oath of office and a disqualifying offense.”

For a President to outright break laws to further gun control, suggests a nefarious agenda.
edit on 25-7-2015 by IlluminatiTechnician because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Media now reporting gunman was slow and methodical, and stopped to reload.

2nd amendment supporters - where were all your "Good guys with guns" to take this guy out?

He had even planned his getaway. Hardly the moves of an insane shooter.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

Bravo sir!



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 11:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: staticfl
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

Bravo sir!



Thank you, he wanted examples. I gave but only a few until I ran out of space. The truth is a bitter pill to swallow, and some just want to keep their head in the sand despite the overwhelming evidence and visual logic that we have all around us. The way the government has been running roughshod over the public, promising everything with every election and never delivering any of it, the slow...almost cancerous approach to shredding our constitution is clearly evident...as the constitution is nowhere near as relevant as it once was even 20 years ago. I can't understand for the life of me how someone always demands proof of events actually happening to erode our freedoms...but notice, LeatherNLace didn't give any relevant proof that this ISN'T happening. They always want everyone else to do the work to "prove"...but they never attempt to do any work on their own to support their own case. Why? Because it's so much easier to make others do the work whiole they just sit back and cast stones of denial.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: babybunnies
Media now reporting gunman was slow and methodical, and stopped to reload.

2nd amendment supporters - where were all your "Good guys with guns" to take this guy out?

He had even planned his getaway. Hardly the moves of an insane shooter.


This is from the Theatre's website:


Conduct PolicyThe Grand Theatres are private property. If you fail or refuse to follow this Code of Conduct, you will be asked to leave the theatre, and may be banned from all The Grand Theatres. If you fail or refuse to leave when requested to do so, you will be arrested and prosecuted for criminal trespassing.


OUR THEATRE PROHIBITS
• Outside food or drink
• Smoking including e-cigarettes
• Possession of firearms or weapons of any kind regardless of whether openly orconcealed, with or without a permit

The Grande Theatre


All the "good guys with guns" were likely obeying the law because the theatre wanted a "gun free zone".



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: babybunnies
Media now reporting gunman was slow and methodical, and stopped to reload.

2nd amendment supporters - where were all your "Good guys with guns" to take this guy out?

He had even planned his getaway. Hardly the moves of an insane shooter.


Even though some states allow for "open carrying" of weapons, people are afraid to do this because the government (and people like you) are always demonizing those that do. You also have to have a permit to open carry, and not everyone is into that, don't have the time or the training, or generally may not 'be into guns' as a hobby, or carry them in anticipation that someone is going to....I don't know....WALK INTO A THEATER AND START SHOOTING PEOPLE?
Let's face it, this is a relatively new trend that is happening more frequently lately (convenient enough for the gun grabbers). People should not have to carry guns around out of fear, they should be able to carry them around only if they want to...and we should at least have the choice whether you want to or not.
On that note, until recently, there was no good reason to carry a gun into a movie theater. If there was a person in there that did have a gun, that could have taken this murderous monster out...I am sure he would have. Unfortunately, he most likely would have been plastered all over the news and demonized for being a "lone gunman" himself, or a vigilante who obstructed justice. The media certainly would have cast him in a negative light....just as they have anyone else who has stepped in and done what the cops cannot seem to do.
Had a citizen been in that theater, had no fear of repercussion from the law or dismantlement by the media. I am certain, that this killer would have been stopped way before it got out of hand. Most of the people that carry guns anyway, are carrying them to protect themselves and their own families, which is why the 2nd Amendment is for everyone and not those that just want to be a hero to everyone else.

Britain removed guns in 1997 and crime has been increasing ever since and is getting pretty bad at this point. In fact, because of the brutality of the crimes (some people getting robbed, raped and beat multiple times - one woman put chicken wire around her home in an attempt to keep them out), but because of the frequency and brutality of the crimes WITHOUT GUNS, ...out of 11,000 respondents to a poll held in Great Britain, an overwhelming 82% of the people demanded to have their guns back. This poll was conducted in 2013. Crime never takes a rest, so I can only assume the percentage is higher than that now.

*When the weapons are removed from the people, the people will be sitting ducks for the criminals who care not for government law, not the criminals that work for them...we have all seen the videos of the abusive cops lately, and the harassment of those who open carry. I can provide video examples if needed.


edit on 25-7-2015 by IlluminatiTechnician because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 11:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa



I'm not denying self defense with a gun never happens. But how can all the stories you have provided be 100% trusted? After all it is just hearsay, since the other person is dead.


So you're saying you didn't read any of those news stories. Got it.


If I ever personally committed murder, I'd obviously just claim they were attacking me and it was self defense... I can't be the only person in existence to realize that would be the most intelligent excuse after committing a murder. lol.


Right, because the police can't figure that out.



Well obviously... criminals are fully aware of all existing loopholes and never hesitate to exploit them. All sales of firearms should require an FBI check and said firearms should always be required to be registered in the purchaser's name... That's just a no brainer.


All sales by a dealer DO require an FBI background check. Registration has been attempted in many states and it does nothing to solve the problem.

Regardless, background checks and registration don't work because criminals don't always get their guns from a source that abides by those restrictions. That's a no-brainer.




True... The reason for the second amendment is to protect you from invasion from the pomes. Though, I'm pretty certain those dudes aren't going to be attempting any invasions anytime soon.


Our founding fathers stated multiple times that the right to own firearms was important for personal protection. I know that the folks who don't understand love to say "you don't need a gun to defend from your government anymore" but that was not the sole purpose behind the 2nd Amendment.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 12:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: babybunnies
Media now reporting gunman was slow and methodical, and stopped to reload.

2nd amendment supporters - where were all your "Good guys with guns" to take this guy out?

He had even planned his getaway. Hardly the moves of an insane shooter.


The theater did not allow firearms, even with a concealed carry permit.

Unfortunately, even if there were permit-holders present, they were abiding by the law.

Your wonderful gun-free zones have struck again.

He was absolutely insane. Look at his history of violence and mental issues. Don't try to rewrite the narrative.

Much to your chagrin, many people are now trying to get training and concealed carry permits PRECISELY BECAUSE of these shootings. Even the sheepiest of sheep are starting to realize that when something like this happens, the police can not help you.
edit on 7/25/2015 by Answer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Answer

What's the sense in banning firearms and then not enforcing that ban in any way? Say with metal detectors or something? Oh wait...infringement of rights. Oh wait...someone will just print a gun out of plastic. This is never going to end.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: Answer

What's the sense in banning firearms and then not enforcing that ban in any way? Say with metal detectors or something? Oh wait...infringement of rights. Oh wait...someone will just print a gun out of plastic. This is never going to end.


So now you want the theater to have a metal detector... which would do no good without someone being paid to man it?

Are you going to advocate for metal detectors in all public places?

Guns that are 3D printed still require metal parts and they are not invisible to metal detectors, regardless the crap being spouted by the fear-mongering media. Don't buy into the nonsense. At best, a gun fully made from plastic would be a single-shot small caliber firearm capable of firing a couple shots before it was destroyed. You can make the same thing out of a piece of PVC pipe so the 3D printers haven't created some new category of firearm that everyone should be afraid of.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: babybunnies
2nd amendment supporters - where were all your "Good guys with guns" to take this guy out?



I take it you missed the part where this was a 'gun free zone?' The theatre had a 'no guns' policy, which surprise, surprise, only the law-abiding citizens obeyed.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Answer

Just asking some rhetorical nd'/or ironic questions, dude. Cool your jets.
edit on 7/25/2015 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Answer

Neither can concealed carriers. It's nice to imagine that some crackshot with a handgun can take out a lunatic mass murderer but what about when there's more than one trying to help? Five people pull out guns and no one knows who the murderer is... because you can't control chaos. You hear a gun a go off, you're carrying... you draw and whip around and see four other people with guns in their hand, who's the murderer... is that guy looking for an innocent to shoot or is he looking for the lunatic? Then there's cops on the scene, their best bet is to shoot all of you because they're in fear of their safety. Sounds too whack-a-mole.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies

Kind of amazing that you took the time to read about the incident details, but didn't read all of them and wound up asking a completely illogical questions.

All you gun grabbers - why didn't the shooter pay attention to the theater policy prohibiting weapons?




posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: babybunnies
Media now reporting gunman was slow and methodical, and stopped to reload.

2nd amendment supporters - where were all your "Good guys with guns" to take this guy out?

He had even planned his getaway. Hardly the moves of an insane shooter.


The good guys were obeying the law. Since it was a 'gun free zone' they couldn't legally carry. As has been said before, criminals don't care about the law. Law abiding citizens were the victims. If a good guy had disobeyed the law and brought a weapon to a 'gun free zone' people would have been screaming about him/her breaking the law, even if he had saved people's lives.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: babybunnies
Media now reporting gunman was slow and methodical, and stopped to reload.

2nd amendment supporters - where were all your "Good guys with guns" to take this guy out?

He had even planned his getaway. Hardly the moves of an insane shooter.

The "good guys with guns" were following the law and not allowed to carry firearms into the theater!

The movie theater was a "gun Free Zone", see how that works?! Lawful gun owners are not the problem.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 01:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74
Firstly, you will never stop all crime. Secondly, by the time the police show up, everything as all over and done with. Thirdly, many people who own (not all) firearms have had the training to be able to determine friend from foe and act on it decisively.

What can be prevented is people targeting a certain place with the intent to kill that does not allow firearms therefore making it feel like a safe place to conduct mayhem. In this case it seems that he did not intend to live and thus cannot be stopped by any means with any law. This is where various intelligent ATS members have spoken up with regards to mental health care strategies.



posted on Jul, 25 2015 @ 03:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Answer

Neither can concealed carriers. It's nice to imagine that some crackshot with a handgun can take out a lunatic mass murderer but what about when there's more than one trying to help? Five people pull out guns and no one knows who the murderer is... because you can't control chaos. You hear a gun a go off, you're carrying... you draw and whip around and see four other people with guns in their hand, who's the murderer... is that guy looking for an innocent to shoot or is he looking for the lunatic? Then there's cops on the scene, their best bet is to shoot all of you because they're in fear of their safety. Sounds too whack-a-mole.


That's quite an outlandish scenario you've painted there and it's just not realistic.

You have 2 possible scenarios:
1) A mass shooter is able to kill without anyone shooting back.
2) A mass shooter starts shooting and a person with a concealed handgun draws and fires... maybe he hits the shooter, maybe he doesn't but if the alternative is to let the bad guy continue unfettered, what difference does it make?

How often do the cops arrive before the shooter has either escaped or suicides himself? That's pretty rare in these scenarios. The majority of permit holders are also smart enough to put away their pistol and make it very clear to the cops that they aren't the bad guy if/when the cops do arrive.




top topics



 
35
<< 22  23  24    26  27 >>

log in

join