Lafayette Theater Killer Denied Concealed Carry Permit Over Mental Health Issues

a reply to: xuenchen

Well that is your hypothetical.

We don't know this mans timeline at all.

To clarify the statement above, Louisiana requires a permit to carry a concealed weapon, but does not require a pistol purchase permit.

Due to these documented mental health concerns and an a criminal record, the murderer could not have legally purchase a handgun like the one used in the attack. It is not known at this time where or when he obtained the firearm.

What does it mean when they say a pistol purchase permit is not required?

The only necessary requirement for purchase is a valid driver's license, which can prove the buyer meets the federal age limits: 21 for handguns and 18 for shotguns or rifles.

Went out and clarified on my own.

So seems the answer to all the questions on what could have stopped his is applying the same background check to the purchase as the application for the CCW.

About half of all people will develop a mental illness sometime in their life, so whatever background check for mental illness they use, it needs to be specific, otherwise lots of people will lose gun rights.

I will hold back on commenting about the shooters because I really haven't investigated it enough. (Although I'll say they all seem hateful.)

a reply to: Sremmos80

Good post.

but why ask if you already knew?

a reply to: xuenchen

I didn't.

I just decided to go find it for my self after I asked.

I don't know every states gun laws, I figured most did background checks at the purchase.

But seems like we have our answer on what possibly could have stopped this.

The man didn't need to have a gun and a background check would have shown that.

But gotta be a gun loving state!

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: xuenchen

Well that is your hypothetical.

We don't know this mans timeline at all.

To clarify the statement above, Louisiana requires a permit to carry a concealed weapon, but does not require a pistol purchase permit.

Due to these documented mental health concerns and an a criminal record, the murderer could not have legally purchase a handgun like the one used in the attack. It is not known at this time where or when he obtained the firearm.

What does it mean when they say a pistol purchase permit is not required?

The only necessary requirement for purchase is a valid driver's license, which can prove the buyer meets the federal age limits: 21 for handguns and 18 for shotguns or rifles.

Went out and clarified on my own.

So seems the answer to all the questions on what could have stopped his is applying the same background check to the purchase as the application for the CCW.

Wrong.

When purchasing from a dealer, there is a background check conducted through the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System. The photo ID is for identification purposes but there's more to it than walking in with a driver's license and walking out with a gun. That is a Federal law.

One of the questions asked on the form when purchasing from a dealer is "have you been admitted to a mental institution by the court" and this guy had been.

He was not legally able to purchase a firearm.

Very few states require a permit to purchase a firearm and those that do typically have insanely high violent crime rates despite that requirement because, guess what, criminals don't care if they get a gun legally.

originally posted by: Sremmos80



I don't know every states gun laws, I figured most did background checks at the purchase.

That's not state law, it's federal. All dealers have to conduct a background check at the time of purchase unless the purchaser has a concealed carry permit. No exceptions.

But seems like we have our answer on what possibly could have stopped this.

Considering the fact that there are many other ways this nut could have gotten a gun, I'd say you are incorrect.

Try doing a bit more research before you make up your mind on something like this.

originally posted by: intrepid
Here we go again. Everyone expounding on their precious guns. The victims never matter. Sad.

Oh hush, Canada.

a reply to: Answer

Well that was the point of the bolded possibly.

Not saying it would prevent it guaranteed.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Answer

Well that was the point of the bolded possibly.

Not saying it would prevent it guaranteed.

Well since he had a history of violence related to mental illness and a laundry-list of "this guy is nuts" symptoms, I'd say that he would have found a way to kill people no matter what.

a reply to: Answer

Which I agree with.

Just guns are usually these guys go to when it comes to deciding to act on it.
And with a gun you can deal out some damage much faster then most weapons.

And the innocent lives in that theater are the ones that pay for it.

When we mass produce guns, people have access to them that shouldn't.

originally posted by: LeatherNLace

originally posted by: LeatherNLace
yet another tragic event involving someone who clearly should have never been granted a right to bear arms. Let me guess...mentally ill...off his meds...obtained murder weapon without a background....it is all too common.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

*cough*

So you're pointing out that a guy who was denied a permit to carry on mental health grounds still managed to obtain a firearm (and we don't know where the gun came from yet) and then proceeded to commit several illegal acts before committing a final illegal act.

Well, thanks for pointing out how well the laws stopped him from doing what he was doing, and how somebody who is denied a permit to carry will often times do so anyway.

Cough and such.

a reply to: Sremmos80

Again, the gun conversation.

It is a deflection from the real problem. Why was a violently insane man walking free?

You could remove all the guns in the world, and it wouldn't fix the real problem - A violently insane man was walking free.

a reply to: ketsuko

You could remove all the guns in the world, and it wouldn't fix the real problem - A violently insane man was walking free.

Well that would have taken the chosen weapon out of the majority of those insane mens hands.

People are going to be walking free, we can't lock up everyone in a cage for ever that we deem unfit.
That is just as unrealistic as taking all the guns out of the world.

Both issues need to be addressed, how people can get to this state of mind untreated and how they are getting the guns to act on it.

The sheriff that denied the conceal carry permit says it was because of the arson arrest. No mention of mental health.

"Sheriff Taylor said Mr. Houser applied in 2006 for a permit to carry a concealed pistol, but was denied because he had been arrested on an arson charge; it was unclear whether he was convicted. Alabama, however, does not require a permit or license to buy or own a handgun."

nytimes.com...

a reply to: Sremmos80

But this man wasn't just "mentally unfit;" he was violently insane. There is a difference.

Adam Lanza was mentally unfit but not violent when he carried out his shooting. There was no reason to suspect he might pop off aside from his general disturbed state.

This man was known to be insane and known to be violent because of it.

a reply to: ketsuko

So this guy just needed to locked up is what you saying?

Longtime lurker (years) first post, I think I MIGHT have known this man. I used to work at a gas station in Phenix City AL and he resembles a man who came through late at night on a regular basis. With that said I don't know for certain it is him. The customer always seemed nice, but easily agitated. I would also like to add if he purchased the pistol here before leaving town our laws are the same - you can purchase a pistol without a permit of any kind, and there many people selling firearms of all kinds privately which means it would not be an illegal sale, and there would be no record of it. (As long as its not Class 3).