Texas Church Shooting : Thread

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: soberbacchus

Any which way..Guys that beat their wife and kids should not be able to buy guns. That should be something that get's fixed.

I think you did a pretty good job of illustrating what could be the cause of him getting a gun.

This guy slipped through the cracks somehow and I sure as hell would like to know why.

The New York Times reports that a retired chief prosecutor for the Air Force said Kelley fractured the infant’s skull, and that he pleaded to intentionally doing so.

In August 2014, he was charged with animal cruelty – neglect or mistreatment. According to a police report from the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office, a woman called deputies just after 10 p.m. to report a Husky puppy running through the Fountain Creek RV Park, where Kelley was staying at the time.

The woman reported that she had seen a man, later identified as Kelly, jump on the dog and punch it in its head and neck several times. Another man reported Kelley was yelling at the dog while hitting it, and that the dog was “yelping and whining.” Two others corroborated the story.

www.thedenverchannel.com...

For effs sake.

a reply to: soberbacchus

So if that was the case, then why did he not receive the more severe charge from the military?

a reply to: soberbacchus

I think the military dropped the ball here.

Everything here says Dishonorable Discharge and all he got was Bad Conduct?

WTF?

a reply to: projectvxn

This is all I know apart from the fact he fractured the infants skull according to the prosecutor.

CBS News reported that the suspect is former “US Air Force E1 (2010-2014). He received a dishonorable discharge.

He was court martialed in May 2014.” The network also wrote, “Kelley is a former U.S. Air Force member who served from 2010 to 2014. He was dishonorably discharged and court martialed in May 2014.”

However, other reports indicate the end result was a bad conduct discharge. According to Daily Beast, “Kelley was court martialed in November 2012 and a judge sentenced him with a bad-conduct discharge, 12 months confinement, and two reductions in rank to basic airman, according to an appeals court decision in 2013 that affirmed the decision against Kelley.”

Heavy has confirmed that a petition for review of Kelley’s appeal was denied in March 2014. The case is listed as No. 14-0387/AF. U.S. v. Devin P. KELLEY. CCA 38267. The National Correspondent for the Los Angeles Times wrote on Twitter that the court martial was because Kelley assaulted his wife and child.

heavy.com...

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Tekaran

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: ZombieWoof
a reply to: ZombieWoof

one more

Why is that legal?

Because it is a single shot (semi-auto), unless illegally modified.

The shooting lasted for an estimated 15 seconds according to witnesses.
He managed to kill at least 26 people and injure at least 20 others in those 15 seconds with the youngest victim being 18 months old.

This 15 seconds thing is being gobbled up by the anti-gun crowd. It's not accurate. One witness said it happened so fast it seemed like only 15 seconds. She didn't use a stopwatch. Other witnesses and law enforcement have detailed that it went on for a significant period of time. Please stop using this number to justify your rhetoric, it's wrong.

My condolences and prayers sent to all those involved in this latest massacre.

I'm not saying the "15 seconds thing" is true or not --- But based on my own observations of car accidents happening, and heresay about other people's observations of car accidents --- The occurring accident scene unfolds as if watching a "slow-motion movie"...and I'd imagine if a person or persons were being shot at with a firearm, 15 seconds would feel like a very long time.

originally posted by: soberbacchus
a reply to: projectvxn
....he fractured the infants skull according to the prosecutor.

This guy is like a textbook villain. A little too textbook, if you ask me. The only thing missing is a link to white supremacism.

Authorities have the video that was recorded inside the church. Church posted a video weekly.

Doubt it will ever be released because of the incident type.

a reply to: TheJesuit

A Good Guy with a Gun stopped a Bad Guy with a Gun. But the Left wont admit it because there Laws Failed.

No matter what, I will agree that even if all laws were followed, there are definitely some loopholes in the gun laws that need to be closed, to keep guys like this from at least LEGALLY getting guns.

Even this pro gun guy can cop to that.

originally posted by: starviego

originally posted by: soberbacchus
a reply to: projectvxn
....he fractured the infants skull according to the prosecutor.

This guy is like a textbook villain. A little too textbook, if you ask me. The only thing missing is a link to white supremacism.

Why bring race into this? He attacked a Church. This is Anti-Semanticism.

a reply to: Gazrok

What loopholes?

originally posted by: Gazrok
No matter what, I will agree that even if all laws were followed, there are definitely some loopholes in the gun laws that need to be closed, to keep guys like this from at least LEGALLY getting guns.

Even this pro gun guy can cop to that.

Except he still got a Gun. The only thing that prevented more damage was a Good Guy with a Gun. He tried to run. He didnt kill himself immediately like most of these nuts do.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: soberbacchus

I think the military dropped the ball here.

Everything here says Dishonorable Discharge and all he got was Bad Conduct?

WTF?

Agreed. Looks like he had some good Lawyers.

originally posted by: Stevemagegod1
a reply to: TheJesuit

A Good Guy with a Gun stopped a Bad Guy with a Gun. But the Left wont admit it because there Laws Failed.

Stopped him how? After he shot literally every person in the church? Brave of the guy to shoot him after the fact, but if you are trying to make a point how having a gun somehow saved the day, you are failing badly.

originally posted by: recrisp

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: roadgravel
The news stated the Air Force said the information on the shooter was entered into the check system.

Right.
The shooter checked a box indicating he had never been convicted of a disqualifying crime.

What happened then?

Background Checks in Texas

Last updated November 3, 2017.




See our Background Checks policy summary for a comprehensive discussion of this issue.

Federal law requires federally licensed firearms dealers (but not private sellers) to initiate a background check on the purchaser prior to sale of a firearm.

Federal law provides states with the option of serving as a state “point of contact” and conducting their own background checks using state, as well as federal, records and databases, or having the checks performed by the FBI using only the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System (“NICS”) database. (Note that state files are not always included in the federal database.)

Texas is not a point of contact state for the NICS.
Texas has no law requiring firearms dealers to initiate background checks prior to transferring a firearm.
As a result, in Texas, firearms dealers must initiate the background check required by federal law by contacting the FBI directly.1

Federal law does not require dealers to conduct a background check if a firearm purchaser presents a state permit to purchase or possess firearms that meets certain conditions.

As a result, handgun license holders in Texas are exempt from the federal background check requirement when purchasing a handgun.2 (Note, however, that people who have become prohibited from possessing firearms may continue to hold state firearms licenses if the state fails to remove these licenses in a timely fashion.)

lawcenter.giffords.org...

The GIffords Law Center fooled you good. It states in there he doens't have to go through a background check if he holds a firearms license. He attempted to get one, and didn't get it. He did go through a background check, sorry to inform you.

Let's simplify this.
He walked into a sporting goods store and walked out with an AR-556. He also had a glock and second gun in the car.
How as he able to purchase those weapons if he was denied a license?

Yeah let's simplified this because you tried to insinuate he dodged the background check system and you were wrong. He bought them from a licensed gun store, meaning he was legally required to undergo a background check since he didn't hold a firearms license (which, to get, you have to go through a background check). The problem is, the background check system failed.

So your claim is that he underwent a background check? But the background check "system" failed?

Please support that claim with clear evidence.
And then please explain specifically what portion of the "system" failed and how?

You also claimed he was "Denied a license"? When and where and by whom?

I went to buy a semi-auto pistol in Texas and I had to undergo a FBI check and wait until I got that before I could buy it, and, to leave the store. That was just a few short years ago, I had assumed that I had a 3-day waiting period, but I was told that is no longer required, which was fine by me, me, who was doing this legally. That is just to BUY a pistol, not carry it. If you are in your vehicle or at home you are allowed to have one in your possession. (Castle Law)

After I got that pistol (I already had other revolver pistols and rifles) I decided that it was time to get my CCW so I could carry legally. To do that I had to get fingerprinted, get my picture taken, show my driver's license, pay a fee to the state of Texas, and a couple of other things I can't remember. One of the main things was that I needed to do was to take my written and field test to get qualified, it's a long process to get permission by the State of Texas.
The test was not hard, but you couldn't be a dummy either, it's really a lot like a drivers test in a way.

Anyway, my point is that you are vetted by the FBI TWICE that I am aware of, and if the people on the other end don't do their job then that is a whole 'nother problem.

I will say that once I traded a Dan Wesson .357 Magnum for a (fairly expensive) bicycle, he took my drivers license info and I took his to cover our butts. It can be done that way, but it doesn't appear (at least now) that it was.]

So in other words he payed someone off because he new his History would show up on a Background check.

originally posted by: fleabit

originally posted by: Stevemagegod1
a reply to: TheJesuit

A Good Guy with a Gun stopped a Bad Guy with a Gun. But the Left wont admit it because there Laws Failed.

Stopped him how? After he shot literally every person in the church? Brave of the guy to shoot him after the fact, but if you are trying to make a point how having a gun somehow saved the day, you are failing badly.

Someone fought back. Police weren't even there yet. Do you not realize how Huge that is? He stopped the Guy from reloading and finishing the Job. He saved the survivors.

a reply to: projectvxn

Which is it?

I have read dishonorable, and I have read bad conduct... do we have a definitive on this yet?

a reply to: Irishhaf

Who cares. He beat up his wife and fractured his infant sons skull.To bad no one got to this POS before he did what he did.

a reply to: Stevemagegod1

Exactly! We have no idea what else this guy had planned. The civilian that engaged him and the guy with the truck should be considered heroes.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Wow nice guy he beat women and children now it turns out he even beat puppies. Whats next stealing candy from babies?