Texas shooting

[Chrisj CMA]

The problem here is that crimes under the UCMJ are not always classified as a felony even if the same crime on the outside is a felony.  Also I heard one report that it was a bad conduct discharge, not dishonorable. The difference in discharge status shouldn't have made a difference in his case because even if his crimes were not "felonies" they were domestic violence which would also prevent legal gun purchase.  Again because the UCMJ has different names sometimes it's hard for a background check to get it right.

[Bighead]

A dishonorable discharge means it was illegal for him to own a firearm of any kind. In some states that includes compound and cross bows.  

Unfortunately, such laws don't carry much weight or do much good in that criminals don't respect the law anyway.  

Doesn't the background check catch this ?

Not funny but 

[Jess from VA]

One has to wonder how much copy cat this bottom-feeding scum-bag SOB had going on.

Monkey see, monkey do.

Beat up your wife and kid (sufficient for a DD), graduate to shooting a pile of innocents and children in a house of worship.  A soon as someone else shot at him, he threw down his rifle and fled in fear like the coward he was.

He should have been drowned immediately after birth.


I seem to recall we had a lengthy thread on arming church parishioners against just this sort of thing one or two years ago.


EDIT: If tried by Special court, the max sentence used to be 6 months and a BCD (but now I think it's one year).  Any higher sentence beyond one year and a DD requires a General court.  Traditionally, the dividing line from felony and misdemeanor was a year in jail.  But you need to look in the UCMJ for the maximum penalties authorized, not the actual sentence given. 

Many times, service members are given a Special court martial, simply because the convening authority is an 06 on the same base, rather than have to bump it up to a general court where the convening authority (07 or up) is at some other base.  This has the effect of limiting the available sentence (regardless of what the UCMJ might actually authorize), but the goal is often to do the most expedient thing to get rid of the SOB as soon as possible.

[Gavin_Sons]

If the bad guy didn't have an AR more people would be alive.

This is false on so many levels. The media and democrats have trained you to think an AR (which you probably don't even know what that stands for) is more deadly than any other semi auto rifle. In that circumstance a shotgun with 00 buckshot would have been more deadly. But go ahead and blame the gun and not the crazed person who did the shooting.

[Chrisj CMA]

If the bad guy didn't have an AR more people would be alive.

Wow. Straight out of Diane Feinstien's dirty play book.  Really! 

[MP]

A dishonorable discharge means it was illegal for him to own a firearm of any kind. In some states that includes compound and cross bows.  

Unfortunately, such laws don't carry much weight or do much good in that criminals don't respect the law anyway.  

Doesn't the background check catch this ?

I assume you understand criminals seldom buy guns legally? So, just pot stirring.

[..]

A dishonorable discharge means it was illegal for him to own a firearm of any kind. In some states that includes compound and cross bows.  

Unfortunately, such laws don't carry much weight or do much good in that criminals don't respect the law anyway.  

Doesn't the background check catch this ?

I assume you understand criminals seldom buy guns legally? So, just pot stirring.

SOP.

[Jess from VA]

Rather than arguing about it, let's wait and see exactly what his actual criminal record was (and his military conviction), and whether he bought his rifle from a licensed FFL dealer, or from some car trunk.

[..]

Rather than arguing about it, let's wait and see exactly what his actual criminal record was (and his military conviction), and whether he bought his rifle from a licensed FFL dealer, or from some car trunk.

But being an armchair "witness", "expert", "jury" "attorney", "judge" is so much more fun 

[The emperor has no clothes]

Doesn't the background check catch this ?

I hope you are being sarcastic. I am pretty sure guns bought by convicted felons aren't bought at a legal FFA dealer. See Mr. Holder and the "fast and furious" debacle if you think guns are only available through the channels that law abiding citizens use.

No, I wasn't being sarcastic. The reports I read were that he bought them at a gun shop but checked the box that said no to dishonorable discharge. It just seemed that would be an easy thing to check. Man, it's getting hard to even ask a question around here anymore. 

[..]

Radio news reports his wife's family attended the church.

[bscrive]

If the bad guy didn't have an AR more people would be alive.

This is false on so many levels. The media and democrats have trained you to think an AR (which you probably don't even know what that stands for) is more deadly than any other semi auto rifle. In that circumstance a shotgun with 00 buckshot would have been more deadly. But go ahead and blame the gun and not the crazed person who did the shooting.

Wow...you guys will never get it will you.  Guns do not make you safer.  If there were some people carrying at the church, it sure didn't do them a lot of good.  The guy still killed over 20 people before he ran away.

Sure, it wasn't the semi automatic gun that enabled him to kill so many, but sure as hell it was the large capacity magazine that he used to do it.  All of these 'assault rifles' come with large magazines.  That is what enabled him to kill so many.  In Canada, such a magazine would be pretty hard to come by mainly because they are illegal.  Can some perp get one, I am sure, but it is not readily available at the corner gun store.

Maybe a limit on the magazine capacity would be a good start for the politicians.  In Canada, our magazines cannot hold more than 5 rounds.  Shotguns cannot hold more than 3 rounds.

[Chrisj CMA]

If the bad guy didn't have an AR more people would be alive.

This is false on so many levels. The media and democrats have trained you to think an AR (which you probably don't even know what that stands for) is more deadly than any other semi auto rifle. In that circumstance a shotgun with 00 buckshot would have been more deadly. But go ahead and blame the gun and not the crazed person who did the shooting.

Wow...you guys will never get it will you.  Guns do not make you safer.  If there were some people carrying at the church, it sure didn't do them a lot of good.  The guy still killed over 20 people before he ran away.

Sure, it wasn't the semi automatic gun that enabled him to kill so many, but sure as hell it was the large capacity magazine that he used to do it.  All of these 'assault rifles' come with large magazines.  That is what enabled him to kill so many.  In Canada, such a magazine would be pretty hard to come by mainly because they are illegal.  Can some perp get one, I am sure, but it is not readily available at the corner gun store.

Maybe a limit on the magazine capacity would be a good start for the politicians.  In Canada, our magazines cannot hold more than 5 rounds.  Shotguns cannot hold more than 3 rounds.

Ya, criminals will be like, dang they outlawed my 30rd magazine so I better not use it

[Gavin_Sons]

If the bad guy didn't have an AR more people would be alive.

This is false on so many levels. The media and democrats have trained you to think an AR (which you probably don't even know what that stands for) is more deadly than any other semi auto rifle. In that circumstance a shotgun with 00 buckshot would have been more deadly. But go ahead and blame the gun and not the crazed person who did the shooting.

Wow...you guys will never get it will you.  Guns do not make you safer.  If there were some people carrying at the church, it sure didn't do them a lot of good.  The guy still killed over 20 people before he ran away.

Sure, it wasn't the semi automatic gun that enabled him to kill so many, but sure as hell it was the large capacity magazine that he used to do it.  All of these 'assault rifles' come with large magazines.  That is what enabled him to kill so many.  In Canada, such a magazine would be pretty hard to come by mainly because they are illegal.  Can some perp get one, I am sure, but it is not readily available at the corner gun store.

Maybe a limit on the magazine capacity would be a good start for the politicians.  In Canada, our magazines cannot hold more than 5 rounds.  Shotguns cannot hold more than 3 rounds.

And you're from where? 

[Rams]

If the bad guy didn't have an AR more people would be alive.

This is false on so many levels. The media and democrats have trained you to think an AR (which you probably don't even know what that stands for) is more deadly than any other semi auto rifle. In that circumstance a shotgun with 00 buckshot would have been more deadly. But go ahead and blame the gun and not the crazed person who did the shooting.

Wow...you guys will never get it will you.  Guns do not make you safer.  If there were some people carrying at the church, it sure didn't do them a lot of good.  The guy still killed over 20 people before he ran away.

Sure, it wasn't the semi automatic gun that enabled him to kill so many, but sure as hell it was the large capacity magazine that he used to do it.  All of these 'assault rifles' come with large magazines.  That is what enabled him to kill so many.  In Canada, such a magazine would be pretty hard to come by mainly because they are illegal.  Can some perp get one, I am sure, but it is not readily available at the corner gun store.

Maybe a limit on the magazine capacity would be a good start for the politicians.  In Canada, our magazines cannot hold more than 5 rounds.  Shotguns cannot hold more than 3 rounds.

Ya know, I really don't care how Canada does things.   Canada is welcome to do whatever they/you want.   I think it's curious how some wish to blame the tool.   I assure you, if I was so deranged as to wish to commit a mass murder, it would not be a gun used as the instrument of destruction.  

I could take out the entire church and block with a little forethought.   Fertilizer, diesel fuel, a timer and a couple of other items and boom, it and the targeted people are all gone.    How about using a pressure cooker?   Or better yet, how about I just go get a rental truck, load it up with some type of flammable or explosive material and point it toward the target and let her rip.    

My goodness, use your imagination, it's not the tool, it's the idiot behind it.   IMHO, that weapon you're condemning is, my last line of defense.

[Gavin_Sons]

If the bad guy didn't have an AR more people would be alive.

This is false on so many levels. The media and democrats have trained you to think an AR (which you probably don't even know what that stands for) is more deadly than any other semi auto rifle. In that circumstance a shotgun with 00 buckshot would have been more deadly. But go ahead and blame the gun and not the crazed person who did the shooting.

Wow...you guys will never get it will you.  Guns do not make you safer.  If there were some people carrying at the church, it sure didn't do them a lot of good.  The guy still killed over 20 people before he ran away.

Sure, it wasn't the semi automatic gun that enabled him to kill so many, but sure as hell it was the large capacity magazine that he used to do it.  All of these 'assault rifles' come with large magazines.  That is what enabled him to kill so many.  In Canada, such a magazine would be pretty hard to come by mainly because they are illegal.  Can some perp get one, I am sure, but it is not readily available at the corner gun store.

Maybe a limit on the magazine capacity would be a good start for the politicians.  In Canada, our magazines cannot hold more than 5 rounds.  Shotguns cannot hold more than 3 rounds.

Ya know, I really don't care how Canada does things.   Canada is welcome to do whatever they/you want.   I think it's curious how some wish to blame the tool.   I assure you, if I was so deranged as to wish to commit a mass murder, it would not be a gun used as the instrument of destruction.  

I could take out the entire church and block with a little forethought.   Fertilizer, diesel fuel, a timer and a couple of other items and boom, it and the targeted people are all gone.    How about using a pressure cooker?   Or better yet, how about I just go get a rental truck, load it up with some type of flammable or explosive material and point it toward the target and let her rip.    

My goodness, use your imagination, it's not the tool, it's the idiot behind it.   IMHO, that weapon you're condemning is, my last line of defense.

Proof most Canadians don't get it. And they have the audacity to say we don't get it? Get real people.

[Rams]

If the bad guy didn't have an AR more people would be alive.

This is false on so many levels. The media and democrats have trained you to think an AR (which you probably don't even know what that stands for) is more deadly than any other semi auto rifle. In that circumstance a shotgun with 00 buckshot would have been more deadly. But go ahead and blame the gun and not the crazed person who did the shooting.

Wow...you guys will never get it will you.  Guns do not make you safer.  If there were some people carrying at the church, it sure didn't do them a lot of good.  The guy still killed over 20 people before he ran away.

Sure, it wasn't the semi automatic gun that enabled him to kill so many, but sure as hell it was the large capacity magazine that he used to do it.  All of these 'assault rifles' come with large magazines.  That is what enabled him to kill so many.  In Canada, such a magazine would be pretty hard to come by mainly because they are illegal.  Can some perp get one, I am sure, but it is not readily available at the corner gun store.

Maybe a limit on the magazine capacity would be a good start for the politicians.  In Canada, our magazines cannot hold more than 5 rounds.  Shotguns cannot hold more than 3 rounds.

Ya know, I really don't care how Canada does things.   Canada is welcome to do whatever they/you want.   I think it's curious how some wish to blame the tool.   I assure you, if I was so deranged as to wish to commit a mass murder, it would not be a gun used as the instrument of destruction.  

I could take out the entire church and block with a little forethought.   Fertilizer, diesel fuel, a timer and a couple of other items and boom, it and the targeted people are all gone.    How about using a pressure cooker?   Or better yet, how about I just go get a rental truck, load it up with some type of flammable or explosive material and point it toward the target and let her rip.    

My goodness, use your imagination, it's not the tool, it's the idiot behind it.   IMHO, that weapon you're condemning is, my last line of defense.

Proof most Canadians don't get it. And they have the audacity to say we don't get it? Get real people.

The real question IMHO is, how does one protect a free society and still retain the rights of those within that society.   

There will always be mental health questions, there will always be criminals who do not care what the laws are.    And yet, some advocate that I should lose my right to protect my family, friends and myself.   There's something pretty silly about that train of thought in my opinion.   

Those that wish to disarm, be my guest, that's your right but, those folks do not have a right to deny those of us who wish to be prepared the right of self defense.

[3fan4life]

It is sad irony that this occurred on a day that had been set aside as a day of prayer for the Persecuted Church. 


International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church:

https://worldhelp.net/persecuted-church/

[Gavin_Sons]

Doesn't the background check catch this ?

I hope you are being sarcastic. I am pretty sure guns bought by convicted felons aren't bought at a legal FFA dealer. See Mr. Holder and the "fast and furious" debacle if you think guns are only available through the channels that law abiding citizens use.

No, I wasn't being sarcastic. The reports I read were that he bought them at a gun shop but checked the box that said no to dishonorable discharge. It just seemed that would be an easy thing to check. Man, it's getting hard to even ask a question around here anymore. 

which is illegal. The FBI apparently failed at their own system. And we need more laws they can't even enforce?

[Psychotic Bovine]

If the bad guy didn't have an AR more people would be alive.

This is false on so many levels. The media and democrats have trained you to think an AR (which you probably don't even know what that stands for) is more deadly than any other semi auto rifle. In that circumstance a shotgun with 00 buckshot would have been more deadly. But go ahead and blame the gun and not the crazed person who did the shooting.

Wow...you guys will never get it will you.  Guns do not make you safer.  If there were some people carrying at the church, it sure didn't do them a lot of good.  The guy still killed over 20 people before he ran away.

Sure, it wasn't the semi automatic gun that enabled him to kill so many, but sure as hell it was the large capacity magazine that he used to do it.  All of these 'assault rifles' come with large magazines.  That is what enabled him to kill so many.  In Canada, such a magazine would be pretty hard to come by mainly because they are illegal.  Can some perp get one, I am sure, but it is not readily available at the corner gun store.

Maybe a limit on the magazine capacity would be a good start for the politicians.  In Canada, our magazines cannot hold more than 5 rounds.  Shotguns cannot hold more than 3 rounds.

Oh, we get it alright.  We know evil knows no bounds.  If evil wants to do evil, it's up to the good people to stand up.  The top 3 mass murders in the US did not involve firearms.
9/11 (3,000 people), Oklahoma City (168 people), and Happyland Nightclub, New York, (87 people).

This psycho could have just as easily burned down the church, or blown it up.  But, that would not engender any false sympathy from the fakers (like a shooting!  Oh we MUST do something!).  It doesn't fit the agenda to demand the banning of a part of our Constitution.  It also doesn't allow these people to dance in the blood of the victims, which frankly, I'm sick of happening.  The antis phony outrage makes me sick to my stomach.  And if you think I am wrong, tell me, were you posting anything about the attack in New York City that just happened?

[bscrive]

I know you guys get a little testy when someone talks about limiting your toys.  Sure, someone could have blown them up, or run the church down with a bulldozer, or something like that, but he didn't.  He used a semi auto with a high capacity magazine, just like the guy in Las Vegas.
Who knows why the guy in Manhattan didn't use a gun.  Maybe he couldn't afford one, since he had two fake ones.  He did manage to do a lot damage with the truck.  Did people having guns help them there?  I know that guns are just a tool, but there are few tools out there that can inflict, so much killing in such a small amount of time.
Have any of you ever sat back and wondered why so many killings have happened in the US these days that are not happening elsewhere in the world, except the middle east.  It's because guns are so readily available in the US.  If someone tries to buy large quantities of fertilizer the FBI will probably be on them pretty fast.  Plus, I doubt there is a large black market out there for that stuff.  You want some semi autos with high capacity magazines.  Probably be able to get that on any street corner.
The problem here is that you guys are too close to the problem.  You need to sit back like the rest of the world does and see the real issue.  But you won't.  You will just say that we don't know what were talking about because we don't understand.  It's sad, because as a third party looking in we can see the problem and it is not just one thing, its a combination of things.  There is no quick fix unfortunately.  It will take time, but I can see limitations to your second amendment being put in and the eventual elimination of it.  It may not be in your lifetime, but it will happen.  It just takes a big enough event to really get the ball rolling.   I believe it will start with the elimination of high capacity magazines for civilians.

[old2soon]

C B S just had a special report-26 confirmed dead 20 injured 10 still critical. Bad Conduct Discharge from the Air Force and they emphasized not a dishonorable. He did purchase all his weapons in Texas. They have set up Banks for monetary donations. They stated they do Not need canned goods and non perishable  items. They are also asking for our Prayers. RIDE SAFE. 

[..]

DailyMail.com reports "his 'bad conduct' military discharge DIDN'T show up on his background check'"

[Gavin_Sons]

I know you guys get a little testy when someone talks about limiting your toys.  Sure, someone could have blown them up, or run the church down with a bulldozer, or something like that, but he didn't.  He used a semi auto with a high capacity magazine, just like the guy in Las Vegas.
Who knows why the guy in Manhattan didn't use a gun.  Maybe he couldn't afford one, since he had two fake ones.  He did manage to do a lot damage with the truck.  Did people having guns help them there?  I know that guns are just a tool, but there are few tools out there that can inflict, so much killing in such a small amount of time.
Have any of you ever sat back and wondered why so many killings have happened in the US these days that are not happening elsewhere in the world, except the middle east.  It's because guns are so readily available in the US.  If someone tries to buy large quantities of fertilizer the FBI will probably be on them pretty fast.  Plus, I doubt there is a large black market out there for that stuff.  You want some semi autos with high capacity magazines.  Probably be able to get that on any street corner.
The problem here is that you guys are too close to the problem.  You need to sit back like the rest of the world does and see the real issue.  But you won't.  You will just say that we don't know what were talking about because we don't understand.  It's sad, because as a third party looking in we can see the problem and it is not just one thing, its a combination of things.  There is no quick fix unfortunately.  It will take time, but I can see limitations to your second amendment being put in and the eventual elimination of it.  It may not be in your lifetime, but it will happen.  It just takes a big enough event to really get the ball rolling.   I believe it will start with the elimination of high capacity magazines for civilians.

What happens when Canada has a mass shooting? It will happen eventually. Then what will your answer be?

[..]

I know you guys get a little testy when someone talks about limiting your toys.  Sure, someone could have blown them up, or run the church down with a bulldozer, or something like that, but he didn't.  He used a semi auto with a high capacity magazine, just like the guy in Las Vegas.
Who knows why the guy in Manhattan didn't use a gun.  Maybe he couldn't afford one, since he had two fake ones.  He did manage to do a lot damage with the truck.  Did people having guns help them there?  I know that guns are just a tool, but there are few tools out there that can inflict, so much killing in such a small amount of time.
Have any of you ever sat back and wondered why so many killings have happened in the US these days that are not happening elsewhere in the world, except the middle east.  It's because guns are so readily available in the US.  If someone tries to buy large quantities of fertilizer the FBI will probably be on them pretty fast.  Plus, I doubt there is a large black market out there for that stuff.  You want some semi autos with high capacity magazines.  Probably be able to get that on any street corner.
The problem here is that you guys are too close to the problem.  You need to sit back like the rest of the world does and see the real issue.  But you won't.  You will just say that we don't know what were talking about because we don't understand.  It's sad, because as a third party looking in we can see the problem and it is not just one thing, its a combination of things.  There is no quick fix unfortunately.  It will take time, but I can see limitations to your second amendment being put in and the eventual elimination of it.  It may not be in your lifetime, but it will happen.  It just takes a big enough event to really get the ball rolling.   I believe it will start with the elimination of high capacity magazines for civilians.

What happens when Canada has a mass shooting? It will happen eventually. Then what will your answer be?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Canada

[Psychotic Bovine]

I know you guys get a little testy when someone talks about limiting your toys.  Sure, someone could have blown them up, or run the church down with a bulldozer, or something like that, but he didn't.  He used a semi auto with a high capacity magazine, just like the guy in Las Vegas.
Who knows why the guy in Manhattan didn't use a gun.  Maybe he couldn't afford one, since he had two fake ones.  He did manage to do a lot damage with the truck.  Did people having guns help them there?  I know that guns are just a tool, but there are few tools out there that can inflict, so much killing in such a small amount of time.
Have any of you ever sat back and wondered why so many killings have happened in the US these days that are not happening elsewhere in the world, except the middle east.  It's because guns are so readily available in the US.  If someone tries to buy large quantities of fertilizer the FBI will probably be on them pretty fast.  Plus, I doubt there is a large black market out there for that stuff.  You want some semi autos with high capacity magazines.  Probably be able to get that on any street corner.
The problem here is that you guys are too close to the problem.  You need to sit back like the rest of the world does and see the real issue.  But you won't.  You will just say that we don't know what were talking about because we don't understand.  It's sad, because as a third party looking in we can see the problem and it is not just one thing, its a combination of things.  There is no quick fix unfortunately.  It will take time, but I can see limitations to your second amendment being put in and the eventual elimination of it.  It may not be in your lifetime, but it will happen.  It just takes a big enough event to really get the ball rolling.   I believe it will start with the elimination of high capacity magazines for civilians.

Jamaica and Mexico have far more killings than the US.  And they have strict gun control.
So, why don't you stay up there in your utopia and concern yourself with your own country's issues?

[Gavin_Sons]

I know you guys get a little testy when someone talks about limiting your toys.  Sure, someone could have blown them up, or run the church down with a bulldozer, or something like that, but he didn't.  He used a semi auto with a high capacity magazine, just like the guy in Las Vegas.
Who knows why the guy in Manhattan didn't use a gun.  Maybe he couldn't afford one, since he had two fake ones.  He did manage to do a lot damage with the truck.  Did people having guns help them there?  I know that guns are just a tool, but there are few tools out there that can inflict, so much killing in such a small amount of time.
Have any of you ever sat back and wondered why so many killings have happened in the US these days that are not happening elsewhere in the world, except the middle east.  It's because guns are so readily available in the US.  If someone tries to buy large quantities of fertilizer the FBI will probably be on them pretty fast.  Plus, I doubt there is a large black market out there for that stuff.  You want some semi autos with high capacity magazines.  Probably be able to get that on any street corner.
The problem here is that you guys are too close to the problem.  You need to sit back like the rest of the world does and see the real issue.  But you won't.  You will just say that we don't know what were talking about because we don't understand.  It's sad, because as a third party looking in we can see the problem and it is not just one thing, its a combination of things.  There is no quick fix unfortunately.  It will take time, but I can see limitations to your second amendment being put in and the eventual elimination of it.  It may not be in your lifetime, but it will happen.  It just takes a big enough event to really get the ball rolling.   I believe it will start with the elimination of high capacity magazines for civilians.

What happens when Canada has a mass shooting? It will happen eventually. Then what will your answer be?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Canada

  guess it happens where it is not suppose to huh?

[MP]

Would be nice if those in other countries would keep their opinions to themselves. Don't like our laws? Don't give a rats arse. Sticking ones nose in another's business is rude.  Stay up there, I'll stay here.

[The emperor has no clothes]

I know you guys get a little testy when someone talks about limiting your toys.  Sure, someone could have blown them up, or run the church down with a bulldozer, or something like that, but he didn't.  He used a semi auto with a high capacity magazine, just like the guy in Las Vegas.
Who knows why the guy in Manhattan didn't use a gun.  Maybe he couldn't afford one, since he had two fake ones.  He did manage to do a lot damage with the truck.  Did people having guns help them there?  I know that guns are just a tool, but there are few tools out there that can inflict, so much killing in such a small amount of time.
Have any of you ever sat back and wondered why so many killings have happened in the US these days that are not happening elsewhere in the world, except the middle east.  It's because guns are so readily available in the US.  If someone tries to buy large quantities of fertilizer the FBI will probably be on them pretty fast.  Plus, I doubt there is a large black market out there for that stuff.  You want some semi autos with high capacity magazines.  Probably be able to get that on any street corner.
The problem here is that you guys are too close to the problem.  You need to sit back like the rest of the world does and see the real issue.  But you won't.  You will just say that we don't know what were talking about because we don't understand.  It's sad, because as a third party looking in we can see the problem and it is not just one thing, its a combination of things.  There is no quick fix unfortunately.  It will take time, but I can see limitations to your second amendment being put in and the eventual elimination of it.  It may not be in your lifetime, but it will happen.  It just takes a big enough event to really get the ball rolling.   I believe it will start with the elimination of high capacity magazines for civilians.

I doubt it. The slaughter of 20 first graders had no effect on any regulations. I doubt this will either.

[LandElephant]

The problem with the limiting of high capacity magazines is the we in the military Marines)  train using standard 10 round magazines with 5 rounds in each magazine.  I can dumb 10 rounds into a target at 300 yard or meters in less than a minute.  All of them head / neck/ or center mass.  All fatal.

So in less than 3 minutes I can send down range 30 rounds out of a semi automatic weapon (AR-15 or M-4) and perform what I was trained for, 1 shot, 1 kill.  5 minutes and 20 seconds with a M-14.  It's heavier and uses a NATO round (7.65 instead of 5.62 or 223 cal).

You did notice that he is prior military.  Even the Air Force trains their personnel to operate a semi automatic weapon at 100 yards and more.  Although killing isn't their primary responsibility, he was trained to use that weapon. OBTW, last week I dumped 50 rounds at 300 yards at center mass with an semiautomatic weapon using a 5 round clips in less that 4 minutes and 30 seconds (I'm a bit rusty and am doing chemotherapy).  I also dumped 64 rounds at 25 yards head and shoulder in less than 5 minutes with my Berretta 9MM.  7 rounds in each clip.  That is 1 shot / 1 kill training. Cleaning the weapons sucked.

So to me limiting magazines is just a stupid as calling an AR-15 an automatic weapon.  If someone wants to kill they are going to kill.

Charlie Morse
LandElephant

[Gryphon Rider]

If the bad guy didn't have an AR more people would be alive.

This is false on so many levels. The media and democrats have trained you to think an AR (which you probably don't even know what that stands for) is more deadly than any other semi auto rifle. In that circumstance a shotgun with 00 buckshot would have been more deadly. But go ahead and blame the gun and not the crazed person who did the shooting.

In Canada, such a magazine would be pretty hard to come by mainly because they are illegal.  Can some perp get one, I am sure, but it is not readily available at the corner gun store.

Maybe a limit on the magazine capacity would be a good start for the politicians.  In Canada, our magazines cannot hold more than 5 rounds.  Shotguns cannot hold more than 3 rounds.

Legal Canadian rifle magazines cannot hold more than five rounds unless...
...you (unlawfully) take five minutes to drill out the pop-rivet "pin" that limits what would normally be a 20-round (or more?) magazine to 5.  This includes time to get the drill from your tool cabinet, put the bit in the drill, and put everything away afterwards.
...the magazine was designed for a handgun (10 round limit) and happens to fit the rifle as well.  And, oh, if you own the handgun magazine but don't own the handgun, but own the rifle that the handgun magazine fits, that's legally fine.
...the magazine can only hold 5 rounds for the larger-caliber rifle it was designed for, but the magazine also works with the smaller caliber rifle you own, and you can stuff, say, 15 smaller-caliber rounds into it.

Reference: https://globalnews.ca/news/619165/packing-heat-how-gun-law-loopholes-tripled-canadas-rifle-magazine-limits/

[old2soon]

Would be nice if those in other countries would keep their opinions to themselves. Don't like our laws? Don't give a rats arse. Sticking ones nose in another's business is rude.  Stay up there, I'll stay here.

             + at the Very Least 1. I'm trying very hard to restrain myself and NOT lash out. I do KNOW on the other hand I would not presume to tell another person much less another Country HOW to handle their affairs. The ONLY time our laws affect you is when you are in the U S of A. The ONLY time your laws affect me is when I am in Canada. And Mel case I didn't mention this I agree with you. My response is aimed at our Canadian. Had my .40 cal for a couple years now and the ONLY time my weapon discharges-fires-if that needs splainin-is when I pull the bang switch-trigger. 14 and 1 at the ready. RIDE SAFE. p s-CUZ I CAN AND CUZ I CHOOSE TO.

[LandElephant]

So for you enlightened ones who feel you have to have a cause.  Why don't you go play Don Quixote and go after all the violence and sexual assault that is portrayed in the TV shows, Movies, and video games.  Maybe that might be numbing the minds of citizens to random violence.  

Good luck on that one enlightened ones. I'm not deflecting here.  I think is a causal effect to the increase in random violence in our society. It clarifies and glorifies the violence.  Go ahead and play sniper on Xbox.  What 10, 12, 14 or older child as well as adults have the need to learn how to hunt men.  Where is your outrage there? Maybe they are getting these ideas from being bombarded nightly on TV, at the Movie theater, or video games. Hey you just might one of the enablers.  Wouldn't that be funny. You being part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Charlie Morse
LandElephant

[Jess from VA]

Hey guys, most of our Canadians are good guys and regularly contribute here in a very good way.

I don't agree with recent posts about limiting guns and/or mags either, and it's fine to say that, but lets keep it family friendly please.  

Thanks for your consideration.

(On the other hand, feel free to unload on American liberals.  And no, I do not speak for management here, obviously.)  

[The emperor has no clothes]

So for you enlightened ones who feel you have to have a cause.  Why don't you go play Don Quixote and go after all the violence and sexual assault that is portrayed in the TV shows, Movies, and video games.  Maybe that might be numbing the minds of citizens to random violence.  

Good luck on that one enlightened ones. I'm not deflecting here.  I think is a causal effect to the increase in random violence in our society. It clarifies and glorifies the violence.  Go ahead and play sniper on Xbox.  What 10, 12, 14 or older child as well as adults have the need to learn how to hunt men.  Where is your outrage there? Maybe they are getting these ideas from being bombarded nightly on TV, at the Movie theater, or video games. Hey you just might one of the enablers.  Wouldn't that be funny. You being part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Charlie Morse
LandElephant

I find nothing funny about any of it. 

[Gryphon Rider]

Would be nice if those in other countries would keep their opinions to themselves. Don't like our laws? Don't give a rats arse. Sticking ones nose in another's business is rude.  Stay up there, I'll stay here.

I've heard plenty of American opinions on the flaws of "Canadian-style" health care, including on this board.

The idea that only Americans should be allowed to comment on American issues is absolutely ridiculous.  American culture, policy, and law has a profound impact on Canada, Mexico, and to varying degrees, the rest of the world.  Even something you would think was strictly internal, like second amendment rights, impacts Canada.  The prolific availability of firearms in the US means that firearms are more easily acquired in Canada, whether legally or illegally.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Would be nice if those in other countries would keep their opinions to themselves. Don't like our laws? Don't give a rats arse. Sticking ones nose in another's business is rude.  Stay up there, I'll stay here.

I've heard plenty of American opinions on the flaws of "Canadian-style" health care, including on this board.

The idea that only Americans should be allowed to comment on American issues is absolutely ridiculous.  American culture, policy, and law has a profound impact on Canada, Mexico, and to varying degrees, the rest of the world.  Even something you would think was strictly internal, like second amendment rights, impacts Canada.  The prolific availability of firearms in the US means that firearms are more easily acquired in Canada, whether legally or illegally.

Many of us welcome our neighbors opinions. 

[old2soon]

Would be nice if those in other countries would keep their opinions to themselves. Don't like our laws? Don't give a rats arse. Sticking ones nose in another's business is rude.  Stay up there, I'll stay here.

I've heard plenty of American opinions on the flaws of "Canadian-style" health care, including on this board.

The idea that only Americans should be allowed to comment on American issues is absolutely ridiculous.  American culture, policy, and law has a profound impact on Canada, Mexico, and to varying degrees, the rest of the world.  Even something you would think was strictly internal, like second amendment rights, impacts Canada.  The prolific availability of firearms in the US means that firearms are more easily acquired in Canada, whether legally or illegally.

                The two words-well three actually-legally or illegally is the VERY crux of what we as LEGAL gun owners are trying to git across here. And as I understand the C B S news report the shooter got his guns legally. My question-when zackly did he lose it and decide to take others out instead of just the one or two he believed caused his supposed hurt? I am in no way shape or form condoning what this turd did. BUT the coward offed himself so we may Never know his motive(s). And as an aside-I KNOW my weapons are NOT allowed in Canada nor would I ever attempt to bring them there. I jumped through Missouri and Federal hoops-laws-to not only carry but to purchase my chosen weapons-firearms. WHY this is needed I have like zero idea because My Constitution Guarantees me these rights WITHOUT jumping through hoops and I Should as a matter of Federal Law be able to carry in Any State But I can't. Oh-and I try very hard to stay legal RIDE SAFE.

[MP]

Would be nice if those in other countries would keep their opinions to themselves. Don't like our laws? Don't give a rats arse. Sticking ones nose in another's business is rude.  Stay up there, I'll stay here.

I've heard plenty of American opinions on the flaws of "Canadian-style" health care, including on this board.

The idea that only Americans should be allowed to comment on American issues is absolutely ridiculous.  American culture, policy, and law has a profound impact on Canada, Mexico, and to varying degrees, the rest of the world.  Even something you would think was strictly internal, like second amendment rights, impacts Canada.  The prolific availability of firearms in the US means that firearms are more easily acquired in Canada, whether legally or illegally.

The difference is this.
When discussing Canadian health care, we are NOT trying to tell you to change it. We are saying we do not want it here.

However, the recent comments by a certain Canadian, not you, are telling US to change OUR laws. Unacceptable.

If he wanted to comment he did not want our laws in Canada, that would be fine.

[northernvalk]

Not a topic they are willing to discuss in the least.........