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.

 

Texas Church Shooting : Thread

page: 41
104
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: EchoesInTime
Johnnie Lagendorff talks about chasing down the killer with the man who shot him with the shotgun.




It's a goddamn shame these guys didn't get to him before he went into the church.




posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: EchoesInTime

Thanks for posting this - I got the info a few pages back in the thread but it's great to see this guy on vid!

Will be very interesting to see how this pans out.

Thanks again.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Xcathdra

The problem is that any law on the gun show loophole wouldn't stop what they are actually trying to aim at. If I have a firearm and agree to sell it to you for $20, then I do.


Agreed however as the seller you are not required to complete the sale. You can decide not to sell a firearm simply if you dont like the clothes the person is wearing.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Greven

If you are a dealer you have to do a background check new or used. However private sales does not require one as long that you are selling it to a person of age in the same state. This is not really a Gun Show loophole as it could be done anywhere such as Walmart parking lots.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:41 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Since we're all playing woulda,coulda.

Maybe the AR came from Fast and Furious.



No, the trucks with the weapons were stopped by Dom and the authorities showed up. Don't you remember the helicopter taking his sister away? Then they scattered before the cops showed up.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Xcathdra

The problem is that any law on the gun show loophole wouldn't stop what they are actually trying to aim at. If I have a firearm and agree to sell it to you for $20, then I do.


Agreed however as the seller you are not required to complete the sale. You can decide not to sell a firearm simply if you dont like the clothes the person is wearing.


Also true, but sometimes, you can't tell someone is going to go out and commit murder with the gun you sell. Try real hard to forget what this guy did and look at his picture and you tell me his appearance alone raises red flags.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I have made only a couple of private sales in my life. All of them were to people I knew.

1 was a deer rifle and the other a .22 pistol trainer for start up youth shooters. Both were sold with their intended purpose in mind.

The deer rifle is not a sniper rifle, the pistol is not a murder weapon, my AR isn't for mass killing, and the size of the magazine is irrelevant to a killer, but extremely important to a self-defender.

Off my soapbox now.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Xcathdra

The problem is that any law on the gun show loophole wouldn't stop what they are actually trying to aim at. If I have a firearm and agree to sell it to you for $20, then I do.


Agreed however as the seller you are not required to complete the sale. You can decide not to sell a firearm simply if you dont like the clothes the person is wearing.


Also true, but sometimes, you can't tell someone is going to go out and commit murder with the gun you sell. Try real hard to forget what this guy did and look at his picture and you tell me his appearance alone raises red flags.


A partial solution is to require background checks on ALL sales of firearms, whether done by FFL holders or P2P sales and regardless of location.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Xcathdra

The problem is that any law on the gun show loophole wouldn't stop what they are actually trying to aim at. If I have a firearm and agree to sell it to you for $20, then I do.


Agreed however as the seller you are not required to complete the sale. You can decide not to sell a firearm simply if you dont like the clothes the person is wearing.


Also true, but sometimes, you can't tell someone is going to go out and commit murder with the gun you sell. Try real hard to forget what this guy did and look at his picture and you tell me his appearance alone raises red flags.


A partial solution is to require background checks on ALL sales of firearms, whether done by FFL holders or P2P sales and regardless of location.


In that case I would suggest opening up NICS usage to regular citizens.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Xcathdra

The problem is that any law on the gun show loophole wouldn't stop what they are actually trying to aim at. If I have a firearm and agree to sell it to you for $20, then I do.


Agreed however as the seller you are not required to complete the sale. You can decide not to sell a firearm simply if you dont like the clothes the person is wearing.


Also true, but sometimes, you can't tell someone is going to go out and commit murder with the gun you sell. Try real hard to forget what this guy did and look at his picture and you tell me his appearance alone raises red flags.


A partial solution is to require background checks on ALL sales of firearms, whether done by FFL holders or P2P sales and regardless of location.

"Shall not be infringed."
You been depressed? No guns for you!



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Xcathdra

I have made only a couple of private sales in my life. All of them were to people I knew.

1 was a deer rifle and the other a .22 pistol trainer for start up youth shooters. Both were sold with their intended purpose in mind.

The deer rifle is not a sniper rifle, the pistol is not a murder weapon, my AR isn't for mass killing, and the size of the magazine is irrelevant to a killer, but extremely important to a self-defender.

Off my soapbox now.


I get ya..

Guns dont kill people - people kill people.

My only P2P sale was to a fellow officer. Aside from that it is the extent of my experience with selling a firearm.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn




my AR isn't for mass killing,


The other night I was watching Discovery channels Yukon Men and he hunts with one.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

This was in one of the articles posted via link



CNN reported that “Devin Kelley purchased the Ruger-AR556 rifle in April 2016 from an Academy Sports & Outdoors in San Antonio…Official says Kelley checked box to indicate he didn’t have any disqualifying criminal history on background paperwork.”


Seems he bought from a retailer



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Xcathdra

The problem is that any law on the gun show loophole wouldn't stop what they are actually trying to aim at. If I have a firearm and agree to sell it to you for $20, then I do.


Agreed however as the seller you are not required to complete the sale. You can decide not to sell a firearm simply if you dont like the clothes the person is wearing.


Also true, but sometimes, you can't tell someone is going to go out and commit murder with the gun you sell. Try real hard to forget what this guy did and look at his picture and you tell me his appearance alone raises red flags.


A partial solution is to require background checks on ALL sales of firearms, whether done by FFL holders or P2P sales and regardless of location.


Most of us are never going to go for that.

That same trick was used in the UK and Australia.

I understand where you are going but history shows you would have to be a fool to register your firearms with a government.
edit on 5-11-2017 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
You know, it is interesting that he posted pictures of a firearm he had... even though he was known by the government to be a violent felon.

Shame that the government spying on its citizens didn't put two and two together.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
If I'm looking for the root cause behind the psychology of the modern mass shooter the first step would be to trace it back to its point of origin. Where did the first modern mass shootings take place? Schools. Ask yourself, in that same time frame what dramatic shift happened in public schools that has now also seeped into everyday conscience of modern society?

I'm not going to spell it out for you. It is better if you come to this conclusion on your own. The answer should be fairly obvious to the rational mind.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Xcathdra

The problem is that any law on the gun show loophole wouldn't stop what they are actually trying to aim at. If I have a firearm and agree to sell it to you for $20, then I do.


Agreed however as the seller you are not required to complete the sale. You can decide not to sell a firearm simply if you dont like the clothes the person is wearing.


Also true, but sometimes, you can't tell someone is going to go out and commit murder with the gun you sell. Try real hard to forget what this guy did and look at his picture and you tell me his appearance alone raises red flags.


A partial solution is to require background checks on ALL sales of firearms, whether done by FFL holders or P2P sales and regardless of location.

"Shall not be infringed."
You been depressed? No guns for you!


and the Supreme court has stated requiring a background check is not an infringement on a persons right to bear arms. Point out in the 2nd amendment where it says a person can buy a guy the instant they come across one for sale?

Its like the TSA checkpoints. Freedom of travel within a state and across state lines is constitutionally protected. The method of travel however is not.

I am a supporter of the 2nd amendment. However we need a balance that doesnt infringe on a persons rights to bear arms and a persons right not to be killed because of mental health reasons or other.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
I was lumping it all together when used properly can be used as a motivating tool for practical purposes. but there are those out there that take it way to far to the child's detriment although these days i believe there are entirely better ways of correcting unwanted behavior so im open to new approaches.

a reply to: TobyFlenderson



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 09:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Xcathdra

The problem is that any law on the gun show loophole wouldn't stop what they are actually trying to aim at. If I have a firearm and agree to sell it to you for $20, then I do.


Agreed however as the seller you are not required to complete the sale. You can decide not to sell a firearm simply if you dont like the clothes the person is wearing.


Also true, but sometimes, you can't tell someone is going to go out and commit murder with the gun you sell. Try real hard to forget what this guy did and look at his picture and you tell me his appearance alone raises red flags.


A partial solution is to require background checks on ALL sales of firearms, whether done by FFL holders or P2P sales and regardless of location.

"Shall not be infringed."
You been depressed? No guns for you!


Part of the problem is that we have a broken mental adjudication system. Mental illness and its adjudication are already disqualifying conditions for purchasing a firearm and is a question on the 4473. The problem is that the people who should be adjudicated aren't because of privacy laws. NICS NEVER gets this information as a result. There's already a strict system in place for the definition of dangerously mentally ill and depression isn't among them unless suicidal behavior has also been observed. We've been using this system for decades, but the FBI and NICS can't report what they don't know.

I think we can fix that.
edit on 5 11 17 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
104
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join