Multiple people shot at church in Sutherland Springs

Gun laws would have banned guns from this Texan
Not this ******* Dumbasses!

 

Why would a gun law ban guns for the first guy? Did he have a criminal record?

 

the guns

 

http://www.4029tv.com/article/man-w...s-gunman-shares-his-story-1510000178/13438786

 

Unbelievable. Give this guy a medal.

 

Take his gun!

 

So you're purposing that we ban bad guys from guns? That's one hell of a concept.

 

Oh wow, now that's interesting, the guy who stopped the shooting was also using an AR style rifle. I assumed it was some kind of hunting rifle like a .30-06 due to them not mentioning it before.

The potential extra victims are pretty lucky that the good guy was armed since cops never got there.

 

Yes, just as I would ban drunk drivers from getting behind a wheel. We need to do a better job of enforcing background checks against people like this guy. He apparently just walked into an Academy store and purchased the rifle. That shouldn’t happen.

 

Well in this situation he was supposed to be banned from buying any firearms, but the Air Force didn't do their job properly so he passed the background checks he should have failed. Interestingly enough, while the feds failed, he was rejected when he tried to get a state concealed carry license.

Basically it was just an example of legislation failing due to human error. Turns out laws don't make people safe.

 

Funny, Abbott wonders how he got a gun without a license! All he had to do was check a box saying he had no criminal record even though he did.

If they actually took their existing gun laws seriously, that might be a start.

 

There are a few people earlier in this thread who really discount what this guy did. This could have very easily been a 46 death massacre if he did not interrupt the shooting.

 

Your arguments continue to get worse and worse. Human error is correctable. Not even having the laws in place to begin with makes it even easier for something like this to happen. But then, I understand you don’t care because public safety is an irrelevant concern to you compared to the so called “fundamental right” to have unfettered access to deadly weapons.

I’d rather engage with people willing to find common ground on tackling this issue:

 

The laws are currently in place that would have banned this man from owning ANY firearms due to his dishonorable discharge from the Air Force which was due to domestic violence.....so I'm not sure what you are talking about. The reason he was able to purchase the firearms anyway was because the Air Force failed to do the right paperwork that let the FBI know that he received that discharge and somehow that was enough for him to pass federal background checks he should have failed....but not enough for him to pass the checks that Texas does for handgun licenses.

So, yeah, the laws were in place, they failed due to human error. What legislation do you propose to eliminate human error?

 

Obama/Trump should have legislated the hate out of his heart.

 

The first question and the fifth question are essentially the same question but have very different results.

 

Found a couple of interesting articles:

http://freebeacon.com/issues/prosecutions-lying-gun-background-checks-fall-new-low/

So basically, we aren't enforcing prosecution of the background check violations we already know about.

And this:

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/294499-sens-grassley-and-cruz-present-alternative-gun-bill

So Ted Cruz and Chuck Grassley offered a gun control bill in congress which also failed...primarily because of the way procedural procedures were set up by then Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. (See Below) It also had bi-partisan support with 9 Democrats voting for it.

So much for the narrative Republicans make no efforts to address common sense gun control.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...day-everything-failed/?utm_term=.dfc1c9811df6

 

At a minimum, keeping the present legislation and taking steps to avoid such human error in the future would be far more sensible then your suggestion that we just get rid of the laws altogether because “hey, they weren’t enforced properly here, so what good are they?”

Obviously I think more legislation is needed beyond this bare minimum, and obviously you disagree and will never be convinced otherwise.

 

It could easily have been a zero death non-existent massacre if we didn't have unfettered access to guns.

 

I don't think anyone was suggesting getting rid of current legislation that bans those with dishonorable discharges from owning or buying firearms. I was pointing out that the idea that we need more laws to go on top of the current laws that failed is kind of ridiculous.

It's a situation where someone fell through the cracks due to human error, not a situation where more laws would have helped in any way whatsoever.