Jump to content


What's with the ads?

Photo
* * - - - 5 votes

Another shooting in San Antonio at a church :(


883 replies to this topic

What's with the ads?

#1 Liz CA

Liz CA

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13283 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 03:57 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2...ting/index.html

 

It seems like a weekly occurrence now. :(



#2 okbud

okbud

    Cylon lover

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12302 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 04:00 PM

So scary

#3 RootAnn

RootAnn

    * Certified Crazy Lady *

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6821 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 04:07 PM

I went looking to see if anyone had posted that yet.

It sounds just horrible.



#4 Plum Crazy

Plum Crazy

    The Doctor's next companion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7533 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 04:08 PM

I'm beginning to believe it's a contagion like suicide and should be treated as such in the media. 


  • Liz CA, Sassenach, transientChris and 8 others like this

#5 seekinghim45

seekinghim45

    Hive Mind Royal Larvae

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4343 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 04:11 PM

Yeah it is sad, I go to a first baptist church.  We have a police officer we have hired that patrols.  Plus we have a couple of sheriff deputies that are members  that are always armed...  So sad that we have to think that way.


  • MercyA, hjffkj and heartlikealion like this

#6 Liz CA

Liz CA

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13283 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 04:22 PM

I'm beginning to believe it's a contagion like suicide and should be treated as such in the media. 

 

I think you are right. It seems every week someone chooses to shoot people in a public place.

Mental issues are obviously involved in all of these shootings but people seemed to deal with it much differently in the past than they do now knowing whatever they do will flash across every screen - however briefly.
 


Edited by Liz CA, 05 November 2017 - 04:22 PM.

  • J-rap and CES2005 like this

#7 Plum Crazy

Plum Crazy

    The Doctor's next companion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7533 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 04:34 PM

It is so so sad being such a small community. Everyone there will be directly impacted by this multiple times over. :(
  • goldberry, J-rap, mom2scouts and 1 other like this

#8 Butter

Butter

    Hive Mind Level 6 Worker: Scout Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6084 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 04:35 PM

Just to clarify, it's not in San Antonio and actually is about 30 miles SE of San Antonio.  Since we moved to San Antonio, I've noticed my parents' news (DC area) often reports things as "in San Antonio" if it happens within 30-40 miles of the city because San Antonio is a place people recognize and can more or less place on a Texas map.  Where it happened is a tiny little town of about 400 residents.  To put that into perspective, if all attendees at that church were from that little town, 1/16 of their entire population is now dead and another 1/16 are wounded.  1/8 killed or wounded in minutes.  This makes me so incredibly sad.


Edited by Butter, 05 November 2017 - 04:35 PM.

  • chiguirre, melmichigan, dmmetler and 3 others like this

#9 creekland

creekland

    Retired homeschooler!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23941 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 04:59 PM

My prayers go out to all involved.  I hate these things.  I don't care who or where or why.  I hate these things.  :crying:  :grouphug:


  • Liz CA, mommyoffive, Seasider and 2 others like this

#10 Quill

Quill

    Team Introvert - Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17738 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 05:00 PM

So horrifying!

#11 umsami

umsami

    Empress of Messiness, but not a hoarder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9606 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 05:21 PM

It's more than weekly, sadly.  It's the 308th mass shooting in the US in 2017.  That's close to one per day.

 

I can't imagine getting together with my family to go worship, and not coming home with them...as well as losing neighbors and friends.  From what I read, it's a small congregation.  Way too many deaths and injuries. 

 

 

As they say, if Newtown didn't change anything....if Vegas didn't change anything....nothing will change.  Feel so defeated by this. :(

 

 


  • chiguirre, Amy in NH, OH_Homeschooler and 16 others like this

#12 Sadie

Sadie

    Beekeeping Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23060 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 05:56 PM

I'm beginning to believe it's a contagion like suicide and should be treated as such in the media. 

 

Something everyone can do is not click on/watch stories about shootings. (unless it is local and there is a need for information).

 

The media covers these stories to the nth extent because they get big audiences. Starve them of an audience, and they may start to dial back the coverage to a level that discourages, rather than promotes, contagion. 


  • Liz CA, Hannah, Eliana and 14 others like this

#13 Fifiruth

Fifiruth

    Hive Mind Level 3 Worker: Honeymaking Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1232 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 06:40 PM

I would rather know and see coverage so that the targeting of a certain group won't be hidden or censured.

There were many hate crimes inflicted on whites by a minirity group in our city, for example. No one knew because the media never mentioned it. It was only after foreign tourists were attacked that the rest of us found out that it's been happening for a couple of years. I don't like that kind of "not mentioning/not reporting" so I want to see everything reported.

It a fine line between coverage and exploitation, though.

So many people are radicalized by watching Youtube videos.
  • Liz CA, Carol in Cal., OH_Homeschooler and 4 others like this

#14 goldberry

goldberry

    In a Handbasket

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10244 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 06:47 PM

My prayers go out to all involved.  I hate these things.  I don't care who or where or why.  I hate these things.  :crying:  :grouphug:

 

Yes, exactly...


  • creekland likes this

#15 CES2005

CES2005

    Hive Mind Level 2 Worker: Nurse Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1157 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 07:12 PM

I would rather know and see coverage so that the targeting of a certain group won't be hidden or censured.

There were many hate crimes inflicted on whites by a minirity group in our city, for example. No one knew because the media never mentioned it. It was only after foreign tourists were attacked that the rest of us found out that it's been happening for a couple of years. I don't like that kind of "not mentioning/not reporting" so I want to see everything reported.

It a fine line between coverage and exploitation, though.

So many people are radicalized by watching Youtube videos.

 

Well that falls under Sadie's "local" exemption.  Otherwise I say, Sadie, preach it, sister.  We glorify murderers the way we do things now.

 

I can't imagine.  I'm sorry for that town.   :grouphug:  :grouphug:  :grouphug:


  • 8circles, Sadie and Squiddles like this

#16 Plum Crazy

Plum Crazy

    The Doctor's next companion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7533 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 07:26 PM

I've been following No Noteriety for some time now. There are studies that show that 30% of mass killings were inspired by previous mass killings and the news coverage surrounding them.

It goes against our nature, especially in this world of instant access to news that we live in. But it's damaging to present and past victims, to their families, and to people who may be susceptible to this kind of behavior much like suicide contagion.

https://ethics.journ...-them-shooters/
  • Liz CA, Eliana, Word Nerd and 9 others like this

#17 Dotwithaperiod

Dotwithaperiod

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5705 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 07:27 PM

Something everyone can do is not click on/watch stories about shootings. (unless it is local and there is a need for information).

The media covers these stories to the nth extent because they get big audiences. Starve them of an audience, and they may start to dial back the coverage to a level that discourages, rather than promotes, contagion.

I'm not so sure I agree. The media does seem to cover it excessively, but I don't think that's a big reason it keeps happening. The news media is not normalizing this, though I do feel the entertainment industry, among others that apparently we can not dare speak of here, have definitely aided in this malignant normality of violence being the answer to everything.
  • OH_Homeschooler, Quill and MercyA like this

#18 Sadie

Sadie

    Beekeeping Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23060 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 07:34 PM

I'm not so sure I agree. The media does seem to cover it excessively, but I don't think that's a big reason it keeps happening. The news media is not normalizing this, though I do feel the entertainment industry, among others that apparently we can not dare speak of here, have definitely aided in this malignant normality of violence being the answer to everything.

 

Well, I don't think it's a big reason either, but is anyone ever going to tackle the big reasons ? Likely not. 

 

I think there should be media protocol which deprives the gunman of macabre 'fame' via endless speculation on, and discussion of, his life and motives. 

 

Not participating in the media entertainment extravaganza re these shootings is something a person can at least do. 


  • Liz CA, Eliana, teachaheart and 4 others like this

#19 goldberry

goldberry

    In a Handbasket

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10244 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 07:38 PM

I've been following No Noteriety for some time now. There are studies that show that 30% of mass killings were inspired by previous mass killings and the news coverage surrounding them.

It goes against our nature, especially in this world of instant access to news that we live in. But it's damaging to present and past victims, to their families, and to people who may be susceptible to this kind of behavior much like suicide contagion.

https://ethics.journ...-them-shooters/

 

Is there any significant movement lobbying in this area?



#20 lauraw4321

lauraw4321

    Hive Mind Royal Larvae

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 749 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 07:41 PM

I'm beginning to believe it's a contagion like suicide and should be treated as such in the media.


QFT

#21 Plum Crazy

Plum Crazy

    The Doctor's next companion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7533 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 07:49 PM

Is there any significant movement lobbying in this area?


https://nonotoriety.com/

It was started by a family member of a victim of the Aurora mass killing.

I do know it's starting to gain traction among sheriffs offices. Unfortunately, they are under such tremendous pressure from the media and public that they sometimes give in. Sheriff Lombardo said in a press conference that he wasn't going to use the suspects name, but later in that same press conference he did. Other sheriffs have refused.
  • Liz CA, Eliana, goldberry and 2 others like this

#22 blondeviolin

blondeviolin

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4601 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 09:22 PM

It's more than weekly, sadly. It's the 308th mass shooting in the US in 2017. That's close to one per day.

I can't imagine getting together with my family to go worship, and not coming home with them...as well as losing neighbors and friends. From what I read, it's a small congregation. Way too many deaths and injuries.


As they say, if Newtown didn't change anything....if Vegas didn't change anything....nothing will change. Feel so defeated by this. :(


This man was a felon. What sort of change would you recommend?

These poor people. They went to worship. The Sabbath is the most important of part of the week for many religious people. I can't imagine how they are feeling. :(

#23 fairfarmhand

fairfarmhand

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10325 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 09:30 PM

The pastor's 14 yo daughter died in this attack.



#24 umsami

umsami

    Empress of Messiness, but not a hoarder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9606 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 09:33 PM

This man was a felon. What sort of change would you recommend?

These poor people. They went to worship. The Sabbath is the most important of part of the week for many religious people. I can't imagine how they are feeling. :(

 

Really? You can't think of one thing???

 

No more assault weapons period.

 

Gun buyback program.

 

Background checks--dishonorable discharge should at least get a ding, a second look.

 

Or take Switzerland's approach and regulate bullets.

 

We keep wringing our hands and pretending there's nothing we can do, when other countries (such as Australia) acted and changed their outcome.  

 

The framers of the second amendment could not fathom the type of weapons that exist today.  Also, historically the Supreme Court never said that guns could not be regulated.  Other bill of rights items are regulated.  http://www.slate.com...un_control.html

 

"The same is true of our freedom to exercise our religions. The court has held (in an opinion authored by Justice Antonin Scalia) that as long as a government regulation applies to everyone equally and does not target a particular religious group, many general laws that infringe on religious practices are nonetheless constitutional. Thus, if your religion involves the use of a banned hallucinogen like peyote, as was the situation in the Supreme Court case involving members of the Native American Church, your constitutionally protected right to freely exercise your religious beliefs takes a back seat to the state’s interest in uniform drug laws....

 

In fact, Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, said just the opposite. In Heller, he specifically said that “the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.” 

 

  • Barb_, Hannah, OH_Homeschooler and 19 others like this

#25 blondeviolin

blondeviolin

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4601 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 09:48 PM


Really? You can't think of one thing???

No more assault weapons period.

Gun buyback program.

Background checks--dishonorable discharge should at least get a ding, a second look.

Or take Switzerland's approach and regulate bullets.

We keep wringing our hands and pretending there's nothing we can do, when other countries (such as Australia) acted and changed their outcome.

The framers of the second amendment could not fathom the type of weapons that exist today. Also, historically the Supreme Court never said that guns could not be regulated. Other bill of rights items are regulated. http://www.slate.com...un_control.html

"The same is true of our freedom to exercise our religions. The court has held (in an opinion authored by Justice Antonin Scalia) that as long as a government regulation applies to everyone equally and does not target a particular religious group, many general laws that infringe on religious practices are nonetheless constitutional. Thus, if your religion involves the use of a banned hallucinogen like peyote, as was the situation in the Supreme Court case involving members of the Native American Church, your constitutionally protected right to freely exercise your religious beliefs takes a back seat to the state’s interest in uniform drug laws....

In fact, Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, said just the opposite. In Heller, he specifically said that “the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.”


A dishonorable discharge DOES get a ding. This man was court martialed. He is barred from having possession of a weapon. But felons aren't often honest.

I'm absolutely not opposed to background checks for a weapon. But I'm not sure that would have prevented this.
  • JanOH, edelweiss, Silver Brook and 3 others like this

#26 Amira

Amira

    In a maze of beige

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8983 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 10:20 PM

It’s not about what specific law or regulation might have stopped some specific horrific shooting. It’s pretty much impossible to know that afterward, and yes, it is true that some people will get around those laws (something that’s not unique to gun laws). Instead, this should be about an overall change in our system. Umsami listed a lot of good ideas. Even if those laws wouldn’t stop every shooting, do we really want to continue in the path we’re on where the US has, by far, the highest rate of gun violence in developed countries? If we don’t do anything, we will continue on that path, and I am not okay with that. At all. So we can say this idea or that idea is bad or will restrict guns too much or whatever, but at some point, we’re saying this is okay. And I can’t accept that answer anymore.

Edited by Amira, 05 November 2017 - 10:21 PM.

  • chiguirre, Barb_, Hannah and 13 others like this

#27 Barb_

Barb_

    Master of None

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10705 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 10:31 PM

THIS law may stop this potential shooting. THAT law stops that one. This is a massive problem that isn't going to be knocked out with one all-encompassing magical solution. We are past the point where we can argue, "One law cannot possibly put a dent in the violence so we may as well do nothing."
  • chiguirre, Hannah, Caroline and 15 others like this

#28 Fifiruth

Fifiruth

    Hive Mind Level 3 Worker: Honeymaking Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1232 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 11:05 PM

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.
  • JanOH, Carol in Cal., Halftime Hope and 3 others like this

#29 Barb_

Barb_

    Master of None

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10705 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 11:07 PM

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.


Pretty hard to shoot up a church if you can't get your hands on the appropriate weapon.
  • Hannah, Caroline, OH_Homeschooler and 8 others like this

#30 Word Nerd

Word Nerd

    Empress Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11732 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 11:17 PM

Nm

Edited by Word Nerd, 05 November 2017 - 11:33 PM.

  • Carol in Cal. likes this

#31 hornblower

hornblower

    Vegan Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11559 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 11:26 PM

Does every single post have to get hijacked and turned into a gun debate? Yelling at each other on a message board saves zero lives.


I don't understand why this would be hijacking this post? The post is about a shooting after all. It wouldn't be relevant in a thread about spelling or banana bread recipes but how is it not relevant here? 

& people's minds *are* changed by words and writings every day.  


  • chiguirre, Hannah, Caroline and 15 others like this

#32 Happy2BaMom

Happy2BaMom

    Hive Mind Level 5 Worker: Forager Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 584 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 11:30 PM

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

 

You have to be kidding. 

 

This has nothing to do with "anti-Christian rhetoric", since the vast majority of mass shootings have been of random innocent people in random public places, not churches. (The church shooting in Charleston was racially motivated). 

 

And semi-automatic weapons (and their ilk) have not been around for 400 years. 

 

It would be nice if you would not use mass deaths to try and play your own special victim card. 


Edited by Happy2BaMom, 05 November 2017 - 11:31 PM.

  • Dotwithaperiod, Amira, Caroline and 26 others like this

#33 Jkacz

Jkacz

    Hive Mind Level 2 Worker: Nurse Bee

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 155 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 11:40 PM

I find the "we need more laws" rhetoric ridiculous. We already have laws - it was already illegal for this shooter to possess a gun as he was dishonorably discharged from the air force. With over 300 MILLION guns in the United States, we need a way to remove weapons from criminals, before imposing additional requirements on law abiding citizens. Latest reports are that it was an armed neighbor who shot and wounded the shooter. Who would your additional laws hurt - the guy already breaking the law, or the one who stopped him? I'm all for laws that will reduce criminals' access to weapons, and I would start by finding out how this shooter gained access to his weapons and find ways to prohibit a tradgedy by like this from happening in the future. But having seen the hoops that my FIL (a law abiding veteran) went through to try to purchase a gun in NY with no success, I'm not willing to give up my guns, my means of protection, until the criminals are unarmed.

And for the record - AR does NOT stand for Assault Rifle. It stands for Armalite, the company who originally manufactured the AR-15. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic (not automatic) weapon just like most pistols.

Edited by Jkacz, 06 November 2017 - 07:42 AM.

  • JanOH, Murphy101, Homeschoolmomto2boys and 11 others like this

#34 Corraleno

Corraleno

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8334 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 11:51 PM

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

 

If you are trying to claim that this tragedy was caused by "anti-Christian rhetoric," you need to back away from Infowars and similar nonsense (to put it politely). The shooter's wife was from this town and used to teach Sunday School at that church. Her mother still lives there, attends the church, and is friends with the pastor's family. The shooter himself listed on his LinkedIn profile that he had been a teacher's aide at Vacation Bible School in the past. He has a prior conviction for domestic violence. All the evidence so far points to an angry, unhinged guy with domestic problems and legally-obtained assault weapons.

 

Of course that doesn't stop the nut jobs from claiming he was "antifa" or a Muslim convert or that the shooting was a "false flag" "psyop" funded by Soros/Obama/Clintons to further the Deep State's agenda. PSA: don't read that shit.


  • chiguirre, CindyH in NC, Barb_ and 24 others like this

#35 Barb_

Barb_

    Master of None

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10705 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 11:57 PM

I find the "we need more laws" rhetoric ridiculous. We already have laws - it was already illegal for this shooter to possess a gun as he was dishonorably discharged from the air force. With over 300 MILLION guns in the United States, we need a way to remove weapons from criminals, before imposing additional requirements on law abiding citizens. Latest reports are that it was an armed neighbor who shot and wounded the shooter. Who would your additional laws hurt - the guy already breaking the law, or the one who stopped him? I'm all for laws that will reduce criminals' access to weapons, and I would start by finding out how this shooter gained access to his weapons and find ways to prohibit a trade by like this from happening in the future. But having seen the hoops that my FIL (a law abiding veteran) went through to try to purchase a gun in NY with no success, I'm not willing to give up my guns, my means of protection, until the criminals are unarmed.

And for the record - AR does NOT stand for Assault Rifle. It stands for Armalite, the company who originally manufactured the AR-15. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic (not automatic) weapon just like most pistols.


Some of the "we need more laws" rhetoric is aimed at removing weapons from criminals. Maybe the problem is the sheer number of weapons floating around out there as well as our attitude toward weapons. This guy has a history of domestic violence. He was thrown out of the military for beating his wife and child. I'm sure his history of violence was well known in a town this small. A few days before the shooting he blatantly posted a photo of the gun HE WASNT SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO OWN. What if he'd posted photos of drugs? I'm sure that would have garnered the attention of law enforcement, but apparently a crazy violent guy posting photos of his illegal AR-15 didn't ping anyone's radar?
  • Caroline, OH_Homeschooler, Lady Florida. and 9 others like this

#36 OneStepAtATime

OneStepAtATime

    Beekeeping Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32492 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 11:58 PM

Just to clarify, it's not in San Antonio and actually is about 30 miles SE of San Antonio.  Since we moved to San Antonio, I've noticed my parents' news (DC area) often reports things as "in San Antonio" if it happens within 30-40 miles of the city because San Antonio is a place people recognize and can more or less place on a Texas map.  Where it happened is a tiny little town of about 400 residents.  To put that into perspective, if all attendees at that church were from that little town, 1/16 of their entire population is now dead and another 1/16 are wounded.  1/8 killed or wounded in minutes.  This makes me so incredibly sad.

I was stepping in here to clarify the location for the OP when I saw that you already had.  Yeah, heartbreakingly, a rather significant percentage of the population of this very tiny town attends that church.  With a town that small everyone in that town knows someone that died, probably all of them.  This will affect them for generations.  My heart breaks for the entire community.


  • Barb_, heatherwith3, Sneezyone and 1 other like this

#37 Jkacz

Jkacz

    Hive Mind Level 2 Worker: Nurse Bee

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 155 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 12:05 AM

Some of the "we need more laws" rhetoric is aimed at removing weapons from criminals. Maybe the problem is the sheer number of weapons floating around out there as well as our attitude toward weapons. This guy has a history of domestic violence. He was thrown out of the military for beating his wife and child. I'm sure his history of violence was well known in a town this small. A few days before the shooting he blatantly posted a photo of the gun HE WASNT SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO OWN. What if he'd posted photos of drugs? I'm sure that would have garnered the attention of law enforcement, but apparently a crazy violent guy posting photos of his illegal AR-15 didn't ping anyone's radar?


With this guy's history, my question is why DIDN't law enforcement arrest the crazy violent guy and confiscate the gun and any others on his premises? I would think the photo would have given them probable cause for search and arrest warrants.
  • Barb_, heatherwith3 and umsami like this

#38 Joker

Joker

    Space Cowboy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7251 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 12:08 AM

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

 

This seriously blows my mind. I just have to wonder what world those who believe we have a pervasive anti-Christian rhetoric going on live in. I don't see it. I am Christian but I also am a huge supporter of LGBT rights and I see so much anti-LGBT / pro (certain types of) Christian rhetoric that it's most definitely not the world I grew up in. 

 

The culture I grew up in, in small town Texas, wasn't awesome but it also wasn't so full of the judgement and hate I see today. And that judgement and hate that I see today isn't aimed at Christians. It would be laughable if people weren't dying. 


Edited by Joker, 06 November 2017 - 12:09 AM.

  • chiguirre, CindyH in NC, Caroline and 14 others like this

#39 Corraleno

Corraleno

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8334 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 12:12 AM

I find the "we need more laws" rhetoric ridiculous. We already have laws - it was already illegal for this shooter to possess a gun as he was dishonorably discharged from the air force. With over 300 MILLION guns in the United States, we need a way to remove weapons from criminals, before imposing additional requirements on law abiding citizens. Latest reports are that it was an armed neighbor who shot and wounded the shooter. Who would your additional laws hurt - the guy already breaking the law, or the one who stopped him? I'm all for laws that will reduce criminals' access to weapons, and I would start by finding out how this shooter gained access to his weapons and find ways to prohibit a trade by like this from happening in the future. But having seen the hoops that my FIL (a law abiding veteran) went through to try to purchase a gun in NY with no success, I'm not willing to give up my guns, my means of protection, until the criminals are unarmed.

 

According to an Air Force spokesman, he received a bad conduct discharge, not dishonorable, and the domestic violence conviction was allegedly a misdemeanor, not a felony.

 

They already know how he got the gun — he bought it in April 2016 from Academy Sports & Outdoors in San Antonio, and he checked the box saying he did not have a criminal history that would disqualify him from owning the gun. So either the store that sold him the gun didn't do their job in running a background check, or a DV conviction and a bad conduct discharge do not prevent someone from buying semi-automatic assault weapons.

 

The Vegas shooter also purchased his weapons legally. And Congress recently passed a law allowing mentally ill people on permanent disability, including schizophrenics, to buy weapons. So I guess this is just the "new normal" in the US. 


  • chiguirre, Barb_, Amira and 15 others like this

#40 Jkacz

Jkacz

    Hive Mind Level 2 Worker: Nurse Bee

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 155 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 12:54 AM

According to an Air Force spokesman, he received a bad conduct discharge, not dishonorable, and the domestic violence conviction was allegedly a misdemeanor, not a felony.

They already know how he got the gun — he bought it in April 2016 from Academy Sports & Outdoors in San Antonio, and he checked the box saying he did not have a criminal history that would disqualify him from owning the gun. So either the store that sold him the gun didn't do their job in running a background check, or a DV conviction and a bad conduct discharge do not prevent someone from buying semi-automatic assault weapons.

The Vegas shooter also purchased his weapons legally. And Congress recently passed a law allowing mentally ill people on permanent disability, including schizophrenics, to buy weapons. So I guess this is just the "new normal" in the US.


Here is a link to the federal background check form. https://www.atf.gov/.../61446/download

I would think he would have had to check yes to 11C if he was confined for 12 months and possibly yes to 11G and 11i, as well. Checking any of those boxes would have stopped the sale immediately. Store should then have submitted the background check form to the federal government which "should" have denied him from obtaining the weapon. If the store didn't submit the background check form, the person responsible should be prosecuted as an accessory to murder.

Then there's possibility 3 - he lied on the form and the federal background check didn't pick up on it.
  • chiguirre, dmmetler and Pawz4me like this

#41 Sadie

Sadie

    Beekeeping Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23060 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 01:22 AM

Relevant factors - male plus history of violence towards partner. 

 

DV offenders are a high risk group and should not be allowed to access weapons. 

 

It would be nice if ppl could stick to proven risks, not invoke the spectre of a persecution that doesn't currently exist.


  • chiguirre, Barb_, Amira and 17 others like this

#42 Tanaqui

Tanaqui

    Qualified Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8195 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 01:53 AM

In fact, Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, said just the opposite. In Heller, he specifically said that “the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.”

 

And for Scalia not to take the rightmost position in a debate is quite unusual, as I think we all know.


  • CindyH in NC, Caroline, Eliana and 5 others like this

#43 Corraleno

Corraleno

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8334 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 02:10 AM

Here is a link to the federal background check form. https://www.atf.gov/.../61446/download

I would think he would have had to check yes to 11C if he was confined for 12 months and possibly yes to 11G and 11i, as well. Checking any of those boxes would have stopped the sale immediately. Store should then have submitted the background check form to the federal government which "should" have denied him from obtaining the weapon. If the store didn't submit the background check form, the person responsible should be prosecuted as an accessory to murder.

Then there's possibility 3 - he lied on the form and the federal background check didn't pick up on it.

 
Well 11c and g don't really apply (it wasn't a felony and he wasn't dishonorably discharged), but theoretically he should have checked yes to 11i regarding a misdemeanor DV conviction. Apparently military convictions don't always show up in background checks, though, so it's possible the store did run a check but the conviction didn't show up. The guy worked as a security guard over the summer and was "licensed by the Texas Department of Public Safety," which one would think would require a background check, but obviously nothing showed up that prevented him from being licensed. If the store didn't run a background check at all, then I agree that whoever was responsible for that should be criminally charged. And if they did run one and the conviction didn't show up, then there is a loophole that definitely needs to be closed.
  • chiguirre, Caroline, Murphy101 and 4 others like this

#44 Amira

Amira

    In a maze of beige

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8983 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 02:50 AM

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

Others have responded to this, but it needs to be clear that black churches have been a target of violence for a very long time. This isn’t some new anti-Christian movement, and houses of worships for other religions have been targeted too.

And just in case anyone tries to say that these attacks listed below didn’t usually use guns so guns aren’t the problem, let’s not forget that guns are one of the most effective ways to kill a large number of people quickly if that is the intent of the shooter. Any loss of life is terrible, but relatively few people died in these attacks. If guns had been used in most of them, the results almost certainly would have been very different.

https://en.m.wikiped...erican_churches

https://www.huffingt..._n_7618022.html
  • Barb_, Caroline, OH_Homeschooler and 7 others like this

#45 Twolittleboys

Twolittleboys

    Hive Mind Larvae

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 762 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 04:32 AM

These discussions seem so pointless.

 

Fact is, there are sick and/or evil people in the world

These people will try to hurt other people

The easier it is to get a gun, the more of these sick/evil people will use one

While there are many ways to kill/maim, modern guns are some of the most efficient and easily used weapons

There is always a dichotomy between freedom/personal rights on one hand and safety on the other

At this point, the ruling majority in the US apparently feels that personal rights in regards to guns trump safety

As long as that doesn't change there is nothing to be done


  • chiguirre, Amira, Laura Corin and 9 others like this

#46 J-rap

J-rap

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11502 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 05:31 AM

I find the "we need more laws" rhetoric ridiculous. We already have laws - it was already illegal for this shooter to possess a gun as he was dishonorably discharged from the air force. With over 300 MILLION guns in the United States, we need a way to remove weapons from criminals, before imposing additional requirements on law abiding citizens. Latest reports are that it was an armed neighbor who shot and wounded the shooter. Who would your additional laws hurt - the guy already breaking the law, or the one who stopped him? I'm all for laws that will reduce criminals' access to weapons, and I would start by finding out how this shooter gained access to his weapons and find ways to prohibit a trade by like this from happening in the future. But having seen the hoops that my FIL (a law abiding veteran) went through to try to purchase a gun in NY with no success, I'm not willing to give up my guns, my means of protection, until the criminals are unarmed.

And for the record - AR does NOT stand for Assault Rifle. It stands for Armalite, the company who originally manufactured the AR-15. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic (not automatic) weapon just like most pistols.

 

The thing is, we're either on a trajectory of adding more guns to society, or we're not not.  Even if it meant less guns in the hands of the "good guys," standing off of this wild escalation of weaponry seems to be in the country's best interest.  And typically, gun sales rise after every mass shooting too.  Do we really want to be doing this?

 

Sure, there are lots of other aspects too, including how do we best handle mental illness.  Many things need to be addressed.


  • chiguirre, Amira, Caroline and 3 others like this

#47 J-rap

J-rap

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11502 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 05:41 AM

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

 

I don't believe it's related to an anti-Christian movement either.  (I mean, there is some anti-Christian rhetoric going on, but a lot of it is sadly justified.  That's for a different thread though.)  However, I don't at all believe that's what is behind the mass shootings.  Many, many types of people from many different backgrounds are victims.


  • Caroline, Lady Florida., 8circles and 3 others like this

#48 Pawz4me

Pawz4me

    Hive Mind Level 6 Worker: Scout Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9628 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 05:41 AM

People have been going to church in this country for 400+ years, and guns have been around for just as long. Church shootings are a relatively recent development. One has to look at the anti-Christian rhetoric which has pervaded our society. It's out and out hatred, and it has spead like a cancer. This is not what our culture was like when I was a child.

This is the problem, not the gun, and it needs to be confronted and stopped.

 

The lack of logical, critical thinking here is stunning, particularly on a board devoted to classical education.

 

I suppose by your logic the Las Vegas shooting was because of hatred of country music, and the Newtown shooter hated young children.

 

Neither, of course, seems to be true at all.


  • chiguirre, Amira, Laura Corin and 17 others like this

#49 Sandwalker

Sandwalker

    Hive Mind Level 4 Worker: Builder Bee

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 296 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 05:47 AM

Pretty hard to shoot up a church if you can't get your hands on the appropriate weapon.

Well there are some 300 million guns in the US, so it's not going to be difficult to find a weapon.
  • Jkacz likes this

#50 Sandwalker

Sandwalker

    Hive Mind Level 4 Worker: Builder Bee

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 296 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 05:49 AM

I find the "we need more laws" rhetoric ridiculous. We already have laws - it was already illegal for this shooter to possess a gun as he was dishonorably discharged from the air force. With over 300 MILLION guns in the United States, we need a way to remove weapons from criminals, before imposing additional requirements on law abiding citizens. Latest reports are that it was an armed neighbor who shot and wounded the shooter. Who would your additional laws hurt - the guy already breaking the law, or the one who stopped him? I'm all for laws that will reduce criminals' access to weapons, and I would start by finding out how this shooter gained access to his weapons and find ways to prohibit a trade by like this from happening in the future. But having seen the hoops that my FIL (a law abiding veteran) went through to try to purchase a gun in NY with no success, I'm not willing to give up my guns, my means of protection, until the criminals are unarmed.

And for the record - AR does NOT stand for Assault Rifle. It stands for Armalite, the company who originally manufactured the AR-15. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic (not automatic) weapon just like most pistols.

QFT
And prayers for the families of the victims, for the church, and for the little town. Let them heal.

Edited by Sandwalker, 06 November 2017 - 05:55 AM.