Lovelle Mixon: Oakland Police Shooter Kills 4 Cops

[Ban Hammer 13,360]

He shot and killed two SWAT members using an assault rifle. Those guys are heavily armored. Why do gun advocates want assault rifles to be legal? Makes no sense.

steven, a .22 can kill a swat officer if the shooter is accurate. head shots always kill.

[Heracles 417]

The thread was already heading downhill BY, the moment you entered it with your affected outrage and silly blame game about how we're too concerned about "rights".

That's my opinion. If you don't like it then piss off or don't comment on it.

PS Likewise, I am sure you are going to sit here and pretend, again, that this is isolated (again). But see I don't think you are pretending. You are a guy who travels from work to your house. So your view of reality is completely different to that of those who have a clue. And a life.

Edited March 23, 2009 by Constellation

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Legal Glitch Allows Assault Weapons in California

Gun guys always tell us that it's useless to pass laws against crime because criminals don't obey the law, but now we find out that in California, some "law-abiding gun owners" aren't bothering to obey the spirit of the law at all, if not the letter. While the national assault rifle ban lapsed in 2004 (thanks to the NRA's bully lobbying), California has retained an assault rifle ban. But not a ban on assault rifle parts, apparently, which means some gun owners in Cali are ordering parts, and supposedly doing it legally.

Frames of more than 30,000 AR- and AK-series guns have entered California, according to estimates from some gun advocates, and can be purchased from many weapons dealers in the state and online.

Assault weapons were banned across the country in 1994 and continue to be illegal in California, even though the federal ban expired in 2004. State legislation passed in 2000 expanded the definition of banned assault weapons to include any semiautomatic rifle that can accept a detachable magazine if it has a pistol grip, flash suppressor or grenade launcher; and any semiautomatic pistol that can accept a detachable magazine if it also can accept a flash suppressor, forward hand grip or silencer. But nothing banned assault-weapon receivers - essentially the frame of a gun.

That created a gray area that many gun owners say is confusing. Gun owners who purchase off-list receivers - so called because they are not on the list of guns banned by the state - are not in violation of the law as long as they don't add the illegal components to the guns, said Randy Rossi, director of the Firearms Division of the attorney general's office. But they could be prosecuted by local courts that consider the weapons to be in violation of the ban, Rossi said.

The San Joaquin County District Attorney's Office and the Stockton Police Department both have said owners of off-list receivers are not breaking the law as long as they don't add illegal features as specified in the assault-weapon ban.

Receivers that technically could be built into assault weapons are legal in the state. Anti-gun groups fear that such receivers easily could be used to build weapons like the ones legislators banned. True assault weapons, such as fully automatic Uzis and AK47s, can fire up to 30 bullets in five seconds.

It's not that confusing, guys. California outlawed assault weapons because they wanted to protect their citizens from the violence those weapons enable. Ordering the frames of those weapons is exactly what we said above: while it doesn't violate the letter of the law, it violates the spirit of it. If the only use of these frames is to create assault weapons that are outlawed by the law, then there's no reason to have them around either.

The receivers were first discovered by firearms agents at a Northern California gun show in November. Since then, lawyers for Attorney General Bill Lockyer have been studying legal options and expect to decide this week what to recommend to the Legislature.

"It's an uncertain legal situation," Merrilees said, adding that victims' rights groups have not pressured the state to update the law. "The only legitimate problem right now is confusion among gun owners about what is legal and what isn't legal."

Doesn't seem real uncertain to us. If the frames are only (note we said only) used to make these assault weapons, then they should fall under the same law the weapons themselves do.

Then again, you might wonder who actually thinks assault weapons are necessary in California. Wonder no more.

Despite the quandary, gun owners are using the quirk in the law to their advantage, stocking up on the guns in anticipation of an eventual ban. Mike, a 21-year-old Stockton man who declined to give his last name for fear of being robbed, said he has two guns on AR15 receivers at home and recently ordered two more AK47 receivers from an out-of-state manufacturer.

"This is the cream of the crop," Mike said, adding that he uses the rifles to hunt squirrels and the occasional boar with his friends.

He uses AK-47s to hunt squirrels?!? We didn't realize there were squirrels in California that went around wearing body armor. And why is "Mike" so afraid he'll be robbed? The guy's got two AR-15s at home and two AK-47s on the way-- he shouldn't be afraid of anything!

This is nothing more than a loophole which should be formally closed. These assault weapons don't belong on American streets at all, whether they be in California or anywhere else. Mike will have to find some other way to deal with those combat-trained squirrels of his.

http://www.gunguys.com/?p=939

I imagine its quite hard to enforce when you have certain States where weapons (and weapon) parts are legal and with so little of the mail being checked its not easy to enforce prohibition in other States.

To say nothing of course of the black market.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

He shot and killed two SWAT members using an assault rifle. Those guys are heavily armored. Why do gun advocates want assault rifles to be legal? Makes no sense.

steven, a .22 can kill a swat officer if the shooter is accurate. head shots always kill.

We'll find out more about this in the weeks ahead, but Charles, I seriously doubt he was able to hit 2 SWAT members with a shot to the head. Also, that assault rifle may have been modified to be fully automatic. I'll be interested to see how he obtained the weapon.

Edited March 23, 2009 by Mister Fancypants

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The thread was already heading downhill BY, the moment you entered it with your affected outrage and silly blame game about how we're too concerned about "rights".

That's my opinion. If you don't like it then piss off or don't comment on it.

I commented on your opinion. Deal with it

BTW what's the difference between not commenting and pissing off?

[Heracles 417]

We'll find out more about this in the weeks ahead, but Charles, I seriously doubt he was able to hit 2 SWAT members with a shot to the head. Also, that assault rifle may have been modified to be fully automatic. I'll be interested to see how he obtained the weapon.

So the guns are too blame and not the user loser? So the guns are what shot and killed four officers then.

I commented on your opinion. Deal with it

BTW what's the difference between not commenting and pissing off?

Whatever you say bubble boy.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You are a guy who travels from work to your house. So your view of reality is completely different to that of those who have a clue. And a life.

Who doesn't travel to work from their house BY?

I love when you post - its like stupid oozes out of every pore

[Heracles 417]

Who doesn't travel to work from their house BY?

I love when you post - its like stupid oozes out of every pore

Dude we can sit here and play these games all day. After all I am the one on $110 an hour. Yourself?

Edited March 23, 2009 by Constellation

[mkg265 2]

Sparky, your pseudo science is amusing. You said in Oakland.

So is that better? We should't be losing an officer in the entire country every 57 hours. But I am sure in this warped liberal mind there is some sort of justification or social issue to blame. Oh I forgot the gun is to blame.

Face it. It's called culture. Was the killer Philippino, Greek, Polish, Irish, Russian, Japanese, Australian, Chinese nope. Certain cultures in this country use violence as a way of life.

At one time the Irish, Russian, Japanese, and Chinese (plus the Italians, Germans, and English) all used violence as a way of life in the United States. Some cultures have taken their violent side underground and we call that organized crime.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Dude we can sit here and play these games all day. After all I am the one on $110 an hour. Yourself?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

We'll find out more about this in the weeks ahead, but Charles, I seriously doubt he was able to hit 2 SWAT members with a shot to the head. Also, that assault rifle may have been modified to be fully automatic. I'll be interested to see how he obtained the weapon.

So the guns are too blame and not the user loser? So the guns are what shot and killed four officers then.

You really are an idiot.

[Heracles 417]

At one time the Irish, Russian, Japanese, and Chinese (plus the Italians, Germans, and English) all used violence as a way of life in the United States. Some cultures have taken their violent side underground and we call that organized crime.

This is 2009 and not the past though. America has a problem with low class Minorities committing crimes. A culture of thuggery is quite strong in certain communities.

Dude we can sit here and play these games all day. After all I am the one on $110 an hour. Yourself?

Hmm thought so mate.

You really are an idiot.

And you are smart by blaming the guns. Dude as I have said before, stick to coloring in games.

Edited March 23, 2009 by Constellation

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Sparky, your pseudo science is amusing. You said in Oakland.

So is that better? We should't be losing an officer in the entire country every 57 hours. But I am sure in this warped liberal mind there is some sort of justification or social issue to blame. Oh I forgot the gun is to blame.

Face it. It's called culture. Was the killer Philippino, Greek, Polish, Irish, Russian, Japanese, Australian, Chinese nope. Certain cultures in this country use violence as a way of life.

At one time the Irish, Russian, Japanese, and Chinese (plus the Italians, Germans, and English) all used violence as a way of life in the United States. Some cultures have taken their violent side underground and we call that organized crime.

There's nothing particularly "cultural" about violence. The American Italian mafia is almost synonymous with NYC (less so these days), but I rather think that there's a heck of a lot of American Italians here who have no involvement with it whatsoever.

[Heracles 417]

There's nothing particularly "cultural" about violence. The American Italian mafia is almost synonymous with NYC (less so these days), but I rather think that there's a heck of a lot of American Italians here who have no involvement with it whatsoever.

So why don't you go live in one of these ghettos then if crime is isolated and does not reflect a culture or community. I'll pay for your moving costs.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

There's nothing particularly "cultural" about violence. The American Italian mafia is almost synonymous with NYC (less so these days), but I rather think that there's a heck of a lot of American Italians here who have no involvement with it whatsoever.

So why don't you go live in one of these ghettos then if crime is isolated and does not reflect a culture or community. I'll pay for your moving costs.

Is that what I wrote BY? I somehow think not.

And you'll pay for my moving costs will you? We would actually like to move back to LA - can I get a check for $4K please?

Edited March 23, 2009 by Private Pike