School shooter used SHOTGUN AND REVOLVER

originally posted by: Dvolbrn
I imagine that pump shotguns that can hold lets say 8 rounds will get heat after this.

I think the revolver will be ignored.

Most pump actions you can remove the plug they insert to stop you at 4 or 5 rounds. Removing it is easy so trying to limit the number of rounds is stupid.

a reply to: seagull

If Drinking it's illegal to carry in most states. You are not allowed to have access to a firearm while consuming alcohol.

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: network dude

But he didn't use a van. He used his father's guns.

And as I said, if he couldn't have gotten them, would he have gave up? I don't know, but since he went ahead and killed his classmates, it stands to reason that he was resolved in his decision. Why did he feel like this was the right choice? Was it because guns existed? Because his dad had guns? Or were the guns just the thing he used to direct his anger?

No he would have just set off the pipe-bombs and pressure cooker bombs he had set up all over the school and possibly killed many many more.......

I suppose then they would want to restrict access to fertilizer and plumbing equipment

But everyone pushing this gun control agenda are CONVENIENTLY leaving out the fact he had bombs too......because it doesnt forward the narrative....

The same as arming teachers or armed guards every 75 feet is a stupid narrative. Unless you secure a perimeter and you know exactly what enters the building as best as possible like a courthouse neither banning guns or arming staff is going to stop it.

I agree we secure court houses businesses but leave schools with limited security. Schools should have fence around campus and people should have to go through security just the same as we do in court houses. Me personally I think kids are much more important to protect them some judge.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
This is why we should require by law guns be locked up at all times, and we should have random checks to make sure they are - I believe there are other countries that do this.

Random checks? Sure, right after you let them "randomly" sniff and inspect your panty drawer. Proper panty storage involves them being cleaned and folded. After all, panties could be used to strangulate someone so they're also deadly if misused.

Other countries in the world have dictators too. Appeal to popularity logical fallacies don't make a sound argument.

The fact of the matter is that we're supposed to have a right to privacy in the U.S., and it should be respected.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: seagull

I have been advocating since the first post I made in this thread and historically to set a perimeter.

Like I said as well I shoot twice a week. I do three gun races. I used to have a ccl before moving to a state with no carry law.

However. There are no rights violated if you have due process. That is literally how the law goes....felons also can't own guns without appeal.

Is a search with probable cause against the constitution? Not according to the Supreme Court. The most conservative judges even. The 4th is a right correct?

If you have a hearing after a confiscation and it is quick like for restraining and protective orders and if found to be falsely accused it is erased from your record I can't see how this is a rights violations.

But please explain how this differs from laws that have existed since Thomas Jefferson.

Let me also say I wouldn't be for a non speedy due process confiscation or if a person were to remain on a list if proven to be no psychotic. And what can the authorities do? If you aren't for people ranting about killing people being checked out?

You have to remember these drugs psychotropic also make people psychotic.

I understand you are trying to have a legitimate discussion here, so let me put what you are saying in a different light. There are a few criminals out there who have yet to be caught. so to facilitate that, we all need to go to lockup and then appeal that sentence so we can be released. Only the real criminals will be detained longer then a few days. Is that cool with you? If so, you get in the pen first. (see the problem yet?)

I hope they prosecute the father who failed to keep his guns in a safe locked place along with his murdering son.
Teach people a lesson in responsiblity. Want a gun? Be responsible for what happens with it.

a reply to: network dude

No I don't.

Do you understand how a protective order or restraining order works?

How about a search warrant?

What I am saying is if there is proof someone is psychotic meaning a judge reviews the material and issues a type of restraining order/warrant a person can have their firearms taken away temporarily until a hearing which would be due process.

Are your rights violated by probable cause searches? They could be. However they are also constitutionally valid according to scotus.

Is a restraining order against the constitution? A protective order? A warrant?

Anyhow the main focus should be securing a school campus and research as to why American teens do this.

The warrant or investigation of mentally ill psychopaths is a secondary issue that would be more about investigating and surveillance than taking guns away. Maybe a warrant allows you to get some conversations or habits on the record to question the individual. I am not saying storm down someone's house without proof or due process.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
I hope they prosecute the father who failed to keep his guns in a safe locked place along with his murdering son.
Teach people a lesson in responsiblity. Want a gun? Be responsible for what happens with it.

Hell just froze over.
I agree with you, Silly.

a reply to: IAMTAT

If you read my posts on this particular subject you'll know I'm not for taking guns away.
I am for stricter laws for obtaining them. I am for aggressive measures to get illegal guns off the streets but I also know that's a dream. I'm for laws that more severely punish criminals if their crime includes the use of a gun even if it's never fired. Make brandishing a gun in a crime worth an additional ten years in prison with no parole on that part of their sentence.
I live in an open carry state but honestly have never seen anyone but police with guns on their hips.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Have you heard any suggestions in more liberal circles as to how to actually stop school shootings?

The focus on gun control at best is a very long term solution that would have no impact for quite some time.

Sadly nobody seems to be discussing how to solve this problem on either side in a relistic manor. They seem to be political talking points that if you follow them through you would see how either impractical or in effective they would be.

They work great for continuing arguments that never get resolved though.

a reply to: luthier

Have you heard any suggestions in more liberal circles as to how to actually stop school shootings?

Yes. Make it more difficult for troubled adolescents to obtain firearms. On the right, there is "thoughts and prayers."

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: luthier

Have you heard any suggestions in more liberal circles as to how to actually stop school shootings?

Yes. Make it more difficult for troubled adolescents to obtain firearms. On the right, there is "thoughts and prayers."

Right and neither is practical in the short term. Of course then you have pipe bombs etc....

How about securing a perimeter?

a reply to: luthier

How about securing a perimeter?

How thick should the walls be? After all, everyone has an inalienable right to own RPGs.

a reply to: DJW001

Well they don't. But there are actually 370 million+ fire arms in the us.

So your ideological solutions won't really matter to grieving families.

Court houses don't get rpg attacks or mass shootings. Neither do airports. And those aren't even regular cotrolled environments people use daily.

You can have students keep things in schools and have separate home devices and study tools. And not have everyone line up for scanners while still passing through metal detectors.

Of course we also need to attack the me talk health problem.

originally posted by: Whoisjohngalt
www-m.cnn.com...

A 17 year old stole his fathers shotgun and revolver and shot up his school and killed 10 people.Will the media...

A. Give the story little coverage because they cant use it to push the "scary gun" ban
B. Reveal the true agenda and start covering more people saying "ban all guns" in order to move the narrative and get people used to idea.
C. Somehow still make it about AR-15s

This is a good case to watch because it lets us see what the debate would be like if all semiautomatic guns were banned. What do gun control people and "moderates" say when someone uses a pump gun, and a revolver to commit a mass killing as they would if semiautos were banned. Do they say "well.... we banned the bad guns. Nothing more to be done here" or do they move on to trying to ban the next set of arbitrarily defined tools.

Rather than ban guns, I’d like to see parents who do not secure their guns properly charged as accessories to murder.

originally posted by: antar
a reply to: JIMC5499

Right I grew up in a family that had one in just about every room of the house. We were TRAINED to respect them, and not touch and we ALL survived.

Some of our closest friends have a daughter who is a top shooter with many awards and trophies, she has been shooting all of her life, their family like ours has never had an incident.

As for locking them up, when your son is 17 he should be ready to use it in a responsible way whether to a home invasion or to hunt.

Training the kid and teaching respect is the key. I agree. May I point out that the military will take a 17 year old and, after training, hand him/her a fully automatic weapon.

a reply to: DoubleDNH

Rather than ban guns, I’d like to see parents who do not secure their guns properly charged as accessories to murder.

Exactly. Likewise hold gun owners who allow their firearms to be stolen and used in a crime accountable. Maybe then people will wake up to the fact that every right comes with a corresponding responsibility.

a reply to: DJW001

Likewise hold gun owners who allow their firearms to be stolen and used in a crime accountable.

Punish victims of crime?

Neat.

Maybe then people will wake up to the fact that every right comes with a corresponding responsibility.

Unless you're a gun owner, right? Because that's not really a right.

I mean, being a gun owner means your 4th amendment rights don't matter.

Being a gun owner means you're going to jail for getting your property stolen.

You antis suck.

originally posted by: DoubleDNH

originally posted by: Whoisjohngalt
www-m.cnn.com...

A 17 year old stole his fathers shotgun and revolver and shot up his school and killed 10 people.Will the media...

A. Give the story little coverage because they cant use it to push the "scary gun" ban
B. Reveal the true agenda and start covering more people saying "ban all guns" in order to move the narrative and get people used to idea.
C. Somehow still make it about AR-15s

This is a good case to watch because it lets us see what the debate would be like if all semiautomatic guns were banned. What do gun control people and "moderates" say when someone uses a pump gun, and a revolver to commit a mass killing as they would if semiautos were banned. Do they say "well.... we banned the bad guns. Nothing more to be done here" or do they move on to trying to ban the next set of arbitrarily defined tools.

Rather than ban guns, I’d like to see parents who do not secure their guns properly charged as accessories to murder.

How about sending key FBI to jail for giving guns back to dad and then dad for giving guns back to would be White House shooter. By the way we couldn't make this stuff up.

a reply to: kaylaluv
Although I partially agree with you, government coming to my home to check how I do anything is egregious to me. On the other hand President Trump could allow for a 100 percent tax deduction for those who do not have safes to get one. My guns are in a safe. Safes are not totally break-in proof but sure slow them down considering my burger alarms are screaming.
The law protects the criminal up to a point. If it were up to me I would set deadly booby traps but that is HIGHLY illegal. I have no patience with criminals. But I do follow the law.