'Mass shooting' reported at Sutherland Springs church in Texas

[bcking 3,157]

2 hours ago, jayjayj said:

 I simply stated we have a mental health problem and a criminal behavior problem in America.  We do not have a law abiding gun owner problem in America.  

 

Why do we have a mental health problem that leads to violent massacres that is unique to the USA and isn't present in Canada, UK, Australia? What about us specifically?

 

Are the people with mental health problems in America specifically just more violent? If that is really the problem, we need to investigate that.

 

Sadly I don't see Republicans in Congress supporting healthcare reform that will improve access to mental health support. So even if that is the problem and not our access to guns, they are dropping the ball on that one as well.

 

Maybe we all just need to pray more and that will solve our problems...

[CaliCat 3,957]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

 

(Forgive me if this doesn't work, I'm new to the whole "posting pictures" thing here)

 

I seriously laughed out loud when I read the part about "No one left to speak for [poor little old me with a shotgun]". Cry me a river.

 

Bullseye!!! LOL. 

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

You   make several of us feel as though you are our wife 

you only get the occasional knuckle sandwich. maybe a questionable piece of lunch meat. 

[charmander 692]

2 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Awww another cute "first they came ... " story. I'm fine with not going any further than the first step but it surprised me shotguns are at the bottom of the ladder.

[Boiler 45,884]

Just now, charmander said:

Awww another cute "first they came ... " story. I'm fine with not going any further than the first step but it surprised me shotguns are at the bottom of the ladder.

In the UK I could have got a shotgun, nearly did, but none of the others, well maybe a very long time ago.

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Man who opened fire on Texas church shooter hailed as 'good Samaritan'

Stephen Willeford says he ran barefoot across street to find gunman before jumping into another man’s car and giving chase

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/06/stephen-willeford-johnnie-langendorff-texas-church-shooting

 

This is the guy we should be talking about, not the mentally deranged loser.

 

 

Why do we need to talk about him?

 

As far as I'm aware the Church attack was due to some sort of messed up "domestic" issue. It was the church that the shooter's wife's (girlfriend? I don't know all the details) family attended. The shooter targeted it specifically. Like many of these large gun massacres happen. Most of the school shootings, the night club. They all had specific target locations.

 

Sadly by the time the bystander with a gun showed up the damage was already done. I see no reason to believe that the guy was going to go somewhere else and start shooting up more people. He targeted the church specifically. 

 

While I'm grateful for the guy stopping him, and glad he had his gun...we still have a net loss of 26 lives. I'd rather focus on doing something to prevent it in the first place.

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, Boiler said:

In the UK I could have got a shotgun, nearly did, but none of the others, well maybe a very long time ago.

You still can. You need to go through an interview process, a home visit, and you need to prove a valid reason to have one ("Self-defense" not included).

 

You know...logical steps to owning a deadly weapon.

[Boiler 45,884]

1 minute ago, bcking said:

You still can. You need to go through an interview process, a home visit, and you need to prove a valid reason to have one ("Self-defense" not included).

 

You know...logical steps to owning a deadly weapon.

Like a Truck.

 

Or a knife.

 

Or acid.

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Like a Truck.

 

Or a knife.

 

Or acid.

That argument is just illogical, and it has already been brought up multiple times. It is just poorly constructed and deep down I'm sure you know that.

 

There is a difference between an object whose SOLE PURPOSE is deadly force (against either a human or animal), and objects that have other primary purposes that can also be used as a weapon. Anything can be used as a weapon. That doesn't mean that everything is a weapon as its "core" identity. A firearm's core identity is as a weapon. It is by definition a weapon.

 

1) A truck is a vehicle. Vehicles can be used as weapons, but they are primarily vehicles. They are for transport. It is also harder and more time consuming to get a license to drive a truck than it is to purchase a gun.

 

2) A knife is the closest thing on that list - But still it has many uses. You use them in the kitchen to prepare food.

 

3) Acid (You mention that one because of the recent acid attacks) had uses in agriculture or industrial use (I believe?). They are also already restricting access to it. Acting far faster than we will ever be when someone becomes primarily used for deadly force.

 

 

Edited November 8, 2017 by bcking

[Boiler 45,884]

2 minutes ago, bcking said:

That argument is just illogical, and it has already been brought up multiple times. It is just poorly constructed and deep down I'm sure you know that.

 

There is a difference between an object whose SOLE PURPOSE is deadly force (against either a human or animal), and objects that have other primary purposes that can also be used as a weapon. Anything can be used as a weapon. That doesn't mean that everything is a weapon as its "core" identity. A firearm's core identity is as a weapon. It is by definition a weapon.

 

1) A truck is a vehicle. Vehicles can be used as weapons, but they are primarily vehicles. They are for transport. It is also harder and more time consuming to get a license to drive a truck than it is to purchase a gun.

 

2) A knife is the closest thing on that list - But still it has many uses. You use them in the kitchen to prepare food.

 

3) Acid (You mention that one because of the recent acid attacks) had uses in agriculture or industrial use (I believe?). They are also already restricting access to it. Acting far faster than we will ever be when someone becomes primarily used for deadly force.

 

 

I remember shooting a .303 and .22 at School, but neither of those involved deadly force against either a human or animal.

 

The Shotgun license would have been to go Clay Pigeon shooting. (Clay Pigeons are not animals, they are made of clay)

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

11 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Like a Truck.

 

Or a knife.

 

Or acid.

none of these items were likely to have helped the assailant generate such a high victim list while they were sitting in the church

[bcking 3,157]

6 minutes ago, Boiler said:

I remember shooting a .303 and .22 at School, but neither of those involved deadly force against either a human or animal.

 

The Shotgun license would have been to go Clay Pigeon shooting. (Clay Pigeons are not animals, they are made of clay)

Which is why a shotgun is allowed for clay pigeon shooting in the UK, after a thorough check, interview, home visit, safety assessment and approval of a "reasonable use" for the firearm (Belonging to a registered club etc...)

 

So as I said at the beginning - you know, logical steps to owning a deadly weapon.

 

My wife's family are West Country farmers. While her dad personally doesn't own one, their family does. Her uncle was an Olympic shooter in his youth. We went to her cousin's birthday party at a hunting club. Not a single gun owner I've met in the UK thinks we are doing things right here. They all much prefer their system. Guns for reasonable purposes in the right hands, but thoroughly screened, checked and reasonably limited (to the type of gun that fits the reasonable purpose - shotguns and rifle for clay/hunting purposes).

 

What we have in the US is a joke. Except our laws aren't funny since they are partly responsible for now hundreds if not thousands of deaths. All those supporting what we currently have are equally complicit. We can't just pray for it to go away. 

Edited November 8, 2017 by bcking

[Boiler 45,884]

19 minutes ago, bcking said:

Which is why a shotgun is allowed for clay pigeon shooting in the UK, after a thorough check, interview, home visit, safety assessment and approval of a "reasonable use" for the firearm (Belonging to a registered club etc...)

 

So as I said at the beginning - you know, logical steps to owning a deadly weapon.

 

My wife's family are West Country farmers. While her dad personally doesn't own one, their family does. Her uncle was an Olympic shooter in his youth. We went to her cousin's birthday party at a hunting club. Not a single gun owner I've met in the UK thinks we are doing things right here. They all much prefer their system. Guns for reasonable purposes in the right hands, but thoroughly screened, checked and reasonably limited (to the type of gun that fits the reasonable purpose - shotguns and rifle for clay/hunting purposes).

 

What we have in the US is a joke. Except our laws aren't funny since they are partly responsible for now hundreds if not thousands of deaths. All those supporting what we currently have are equally complicit. We can't just pray for it to go away. 

I use my Rifle for Hunting, I have a couple of .22LR's for plinking, all legitimate uses.

 

None of which of course is confirmable.

[Boiler 45,884]

 

41 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

you only get the occasional knuckle sandwich. maybe a questionable piece of lunch meat. 

I would like to remind a certain poster that VJ is a Family Friendly site.

[Póg mo 1,749]

51 minutes ago, Boiler said:

No, first they came for fully automatic firearms. Get it right