Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lizzie Zoom]

Well he was "sane" enough to book a hotel room and get 10 guns up there,early reports said the police had shot him when they stormed the room,while later reports say he shot himself.Whichever way he's gone so I guess we'll never really know the reason for him committing this atrocity.Sympathies are with the families of all the victims.

The authorities now say 23 guns were found in that hotel room, and there is a suspicion that some of those guns used were altered to allow for very rapid firing, 90 rounds in 10 seconds; far faster than a human can pull a trigger.

23 guns in the hotel room plus 19 more at his house, plus "thousands" of rounds plus explosives plus "electronic devices"!!  he certainly seemed prepared for what he intended !!

I wonder how many more Americans, thousands, possibly millions, have an arsenal of weapons on this scale or even far greater.  I read somewhere that there are apparently 300 million guns in the USA, almost one for every American.  I reckon on the basis of this case and others we have read about that it is far greater in number than this.

[Sir Tigger KC]

I wonder how many more Americans, thousands, possibly millions, have an arsenal of weapons on this scale or even far greater.  I read somewhere that there are apparently 300 million guns in the USA, almost one for every American.  I reckon on the basis of this case and others we have read about that it is far greater in number than this.

My mate used to live in Houston TX and his suburban house had a gun safe the size of a large wardrobe, with a rack for 10-15 rifles and large drawers for handguns and ammo.     Apparently this is normal in Texas and I'm sure across much of the US. 

[STEMO]

Perhaps, like a lot of people, he couldn’t stand country and western.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Nothing wrong with a bit of Hank Williams. 

I think its difficult for us to understand the American mentality. Freedom is a big thing to them. If the state can hold as many weapons as it wants to but citizens aren't allowed weapons, then they consider that a great threat to their freedom and the state become too big and powerful.
I can understand that, but as already said, it already has limits, and its obviously time the limits were tightened. When almost anyone can walk into Walmart and fill their trolley with an array of guns and ammo along with their groceries, and then go out and slaughter many innocent people, only a moron would argue against some kind of change being the sensible course of action.

[Lizzie Zoom]

Nothing wrong with a bit of Hank Williams. 

I think its difficult for us to understand the American mentality. Freedom is a big thing to them. If the state can hold as many weapons as it wants to but citizens aren't allowed weapons, then they consider that a great threat to their freedom and the state become too big and powerful.
I can understand that, but as already said, it already has limits, and its obviously time the limits were tightened. When almost anyone can walk into Walmart and fill their trolley with an array of guns and ammo along with their groceries, and then go out and slaughter many innocent people, only a moron would argue against some kind of change being the sensible course of action.

Only a moron Country would rule that automatic assault weapons are illegal, semi-automatic are not, but (according to an American correspondent) there is a device you can buy from gun shops LEGALLY that converts a semi to a full automatic.  I love the USA, but things like this.................

My ex-military American friends didn't own any guns as they disagreed strongly with them being so readily available, and that was in the 1990's.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

It isn't a moron country, its a great country, where polls show a majority of people favour tighter restrictions on ownership of weapons.
It needs some of its more sensible politicians to come up with a plan to take on the very powerful NRA.

[Lizzie Zoom]

It isn't a moron country, its a great country, where polls show a majority of people favour tighter restrictions on ownership of weapons.
It needs some of its more sensible politicians to come up with a plan to take on the very powerful NRA.

But it is the people who are voting in their politicians, who are in a majority Republicans, including of course Trump.  The Republicans hold the majority in both Houses, and are in their strongest position since 1928.  Most Americans understand the connection between the Repuplican Party and the NRA and them being totally against an anti-gun control policy, yet it is the Repuplicans who get the vote. So, yes, it is moronic that the situation is as it is and obviously your highlighted statement does not ring true in practice. The people make the country, and yes it is a great country which, as I said, I love. But on this issue the people/country is generally moronic.

[Bigron]

Aw Lizzie, you can't blame the people: they were faced with a choice between Trump and Clinton, neither of whom were worth a single vote it the first place.
What were they to do - not vote at all?

Ron.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Exactly. Many people voted while holding their noses in the election.
I would imagine most Americans still believe in the right to bear arms, under certain circumstances, which I can understand. But don't believe people should be allowed to wander around willy nilly with automatic assault rifles.

[Bigron]

I am unable to understand this "Right to bear arms" concept. If you have a gun, surely you know that you intend to use it, which makes you a potential murderer? If you never intend to use it, why have it in the first place?
I accept that there are places in remote areas where there are predators, as has been stated, but in the vast majority of locations, no such dangers exist, so NO excuse.

Ron.

[Andy B]

...... If you have a gun, surely you know that you intend to use it, which makes you a potential murderer? If you never intend to use it, why have it in the first place? .....

Isn't that the same argument for having nuclear weapons? 

[Entwood]

I am unable to understand this "Right to bear arms" concept. If you have a gun, surely you know that you intend to use it, which makes you a potential murderer? If you never intend to use it, why have it in the first place?
I accept that there are places in remote areas where there are predators, as has been stated, but in the vast majority of locations, no such dangers exist, so NO excuse.

Ron.

That's 'cos you ain't old enough .. by about 200 and a few years !!

The "right to bear arms" was enshrined in the US constitution as the 2nd Amendment in 1791 and reads "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

and the wording is important ..  VERY important

At the time idea of the "united" states was very, very new, and each state was still pretty autonomous, and protected its perceived "rights" with vigour. There was a strong fear that the "new" centralised government would "take over" and restrict each states right to self defence, among other things. The idea of a central army did not exist, each town / state / region formed its own local militia.

Hence the precise wording that starts "a well regulated militia......"  and includes "the security of a free State" gives a strong indication of the purpose for which it was made.

Those days are long since past, but the NRA has distorted the real reason for Amendment 2 and focuses on the narrow last few words "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." which is not what the Founding Fathers intended, and is not needed in modern society as the actual idea of forming a militia to protect a state is somewhat ridiculous.

However, that's why the words exist, that's how they have been distorted, and that's why America is in mourning right now.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Very informative and well written. 

[LC0112G]

That's 'cos you ain't old enough .. by about 200 and a few years !!

The "right to bear arms" was enshrined in the US constitution as the 2nd Amendment in 1791 and reads "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

and the wording is important ..  VERY important

At the time idea of the "united" states was very, very new, and each state was still pretty autonomous, and protected its perceived "rights" with vigour. There was a strong fear that the "new" centralised government would "take over" and restrict each states right to self defence, among other things. The idea of a central army did not exist, each town / state / region formed its own local militia.

Hence the precise wording that starts "a well regulated militia......"  and includes "the security of a free State" gives a strong indication of the purpose for which it was made.

Those days are long since past, but the NRA has distorted the real reason for Amendment 2 and focuses on the narrow last few words "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." which is not what the Founding Fathers intended, and is not needed in modern society as the actual idea of forming a militia to protect a state is somewhat ridiculous.

However, that's why the words exist, that's how they have been distorted, and that's why America is in mourning right now.

Err, not quite. Each state has a "National Guard" - these are the Militia men that protect the state. Some states have an "Air National Guard" which operate front line aircraft to protect the state(s). Some (most) have an "Army National Guard" which are fully armed soldiers. The National Guard(s) are manned by a mix of full time and part time soldiers/airmen, but report directly to the governors of their respective states.

Federal forces include the regular Army, Airforce (USAF) and Navy. These are controlled by the President. In peacetime, the president does NOT and cannot control the national guard(s). Further the regular Army, Airforce and Navy are forbidden by law from operating within the 50 states - they are for use abroad only. This is why whenever there is a natural disaster in the USA it's always the (Army) National Guard that's called in, and never the Army/Marines. If the state Governors need more help they first request it from neibouring states governors who then supply their own National Guards. It's only in extreme cases where the governors request federal help that the Army/Navy/Marines get involved.

Air defence of the continental USA is performed only by Air National Guard units. Regular USAF units do not stand QRA.

In time of war, the President can mobilise NG units and 'merge' them into regular operations. However, this can only be used for operations abroad. He can't mobilise the Nevada ArNG and then order them to invade California for instance.

However, as you say "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms" is where the prolems all really lie.

[BazaJT]

Apparently he even rigged cctv cameras in the hallwayso he could monitor the approach of the police.They are going to talk to his girlfriend-who was out of the country-to see if she can shed any light on possible motives he may have had for doing this.