Your Weekly Mass Shooting

xsanguine wrote:Now I can see pics of the fucker's kids (good luck to them... geez) and smell his axe body spray through a computer screen within a few hours after he just shot up a Christmas party.

Like Ty just... said.

http://westmipolitics.blogspot.com/2015/12/breaking-california-attacker-identified.html

>>>UPDATE: The Daily Beast has amended their story and have now retracted their previous identification. Evidently, the man they identified, subsequently used by WMP for this article, is the suspect's BROTHER with the same name. WMP regrets the confusion. He has now deleted his Facebook...

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:Hey maybe we should all be political dicks and make sarcastic remarks about shit and act like heartless assholes on both sides of the political spectrum. Because politics are more important than working on fixing shit.

-America in 2015.

Dr. Strangelove wrote:You youngsters don't remember the 1970s - this is a fucking picnic compared to then. There were large terrorist actions throughout Europe back then - they specialized in shooting up airports and hijacking planes. In the USA we had shootings - I remember the McDonald's shooting, postal workers and also school shootings (I Don't Like Mondays).

More things change the more they stay the same

Robert J Sakimano wrote:love how the right wing patriotic gun enthusiasts prefer not to "politicize" events such as this.. instead, let's offer "thoughts and prayers"..

Robert J Sakimano wrote:oh - and this is how much he right wing patriotic gun enthusiasts a) love America and b) really want to do something about terrorism..

A legal loophole allows suspected terrorists on the government’s no-fly list to legally buy guns, but a bill to fix that will likely wither on the vine. The federal Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act, even in the wake of last week’s terrorist killing of 129 people in Paris, remains a long shot due to its rabid pro-gun opponents.

NRA, Republicans Block Law to Stop Suspected Terrorists From Purchasing Guns

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

xsanguine wrote:I'm down for limiting and curtailing freedoms, Bob. That's usually the correct response. Who needs them, anyways?

It's time to stop this whole "free society" mess... because bad things happen and eventually we can eliminate them if an autonomous corporate enitty would just have the willpower to determine what property can own.

I"m all for freedom - for instance, I believe the innocent people murdered yesterday should be free to live their lives today.

crazy thought, right?

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

xsanguine wrote:

Not at all. I agree... sucks that criminals decided to murder them, whether it's due to an antiquated religious ideology, money, etc...

Penalties should be severe on individuals who initiate force on others...

Now what does that have to do with everyone else, though?

I agree. And, yes, it is a peril of living in a "free society" - except we're really not all that free. Except to buy guns - that's one thing we're very, very free to do.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Ever heard of due process Bob? So now you're favoring stripping rights from people that haven't been convicted of any crime and in most cases haven't even been accused of a crime? Wow.

I'm in favor of protecting innocent people. I'm sorry that you aren't.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

xsanguine wrote:

Not at all. I agree... sucks that criminals decided to murder them, whether it's due to an antiquated religious ideology, money, etc...

Penalties should be severe on individuals who initiate force on others...

Now what does that have to do with everyone else, though?

I agree. And, yes, it is a peril of living in a "free society" - except we're really not all that free. Except to buy guns - that's one thing we're very, very free to do.

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:Hi guys, I see we have another thread about multiple people getting murdered that devolved into a political hissy fit.

Good talk, see you later.

Yesterday the country got the perfect Rorschach test of violence. People who want to downplay violent Islamist jihadism and self-radicalization among American-born Muslims will see “workplace violence” or an excuse for another gun control push. Others will contend is an Islamist sleeper cell, even if it isn’t formally set up by ISIS or al-Qaeda.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:Hi guys, I see we have another thread about multiple people getting murdered that devolved into a political hissy fit.

Good talk, see you later.

What would you prefer to talk about in this thread?

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

xsanguine wrote:

I agree we're not that free. That's something I've lamented about for a long time. That's why I'm not in favor of curtailing or limiting even more freedoms. I'd prefer to go to the other side of the spectrum.

What's your idea, then, Bob? I guess I'm not sure what you're suggesting.

in all honesty, I don't really have the answers - nobody does or something would be done about it.

What I do believe is that we need sensible gun control legislation, we need to de-stigmatize the need for mental healthcare in the United States, make mental healthcare screening widely available just as we screen for other health-related issues, we need to value human life in America, parents need to turn off the TV, the smart phones and the computer and spend time with their kids and we need a societal revolution where middle school kids can name more members of the Supreme Court of the United States than contestants on Dancing With the Stars.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:I think a good first step would be disallowing suspects on a "terror watch list" from legally purchasing a firearm. I mean, they can't get on an airplane but they can legally buy an assault rifle?

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

xsanguine wrote:

I agree with nearly everything you stated. I really do. I guess I'm just not sure what "sensible" gun control legislation entails. That's what I was getting at.

I think a good first step would be disallowing suspects on a "terror watch list" from legally purchasing a firearm. I mean, they can't get on an airplane but they can legally buy an assault rifle?

I'm going running.. I'll be back. I hope. Please keep me in your thoughts and prayers.  

The relevant legal environment in which the crimes did occur is in many ways a model for what politicians mean when they talk about "common sense gun safety laws."

California has since 1989 banned a set of long guns it classifies as "assault rifles," see here for details. And "Generally, it is illegal to buy, manufacture, import, keep for sale, expose for sale, give or lend any large-capacity magazine (able to accept more than 10 rounds) in California."

California also has a list of types of specific handgun models that are legal for sale, "available on the DOJ website at http://certguns.doj.ca.gov/," with all others presumptively illegal.

Here are types of people who can't legally obtain guns in California:

Any person convicted of any felony or any offense enumerated in Penal Code section 29905. [A wide variety of violent offenses, including murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping]

• Any person convicted of an offense enumerated in Penal Code section 23515. [anyone who had used a firearm in a violent offense]

• Any person with two or more convictions for violating Penal Code section 417, subdivision (a)(2) [anyone who has waved a gun in a quarrel, essentially, not in self-defense]

• Any person adjudicated to be a mentally disordered sex offender...

• Any person found by a court to be mentally incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of insanity of any crime, unless the court has made a finding of restoration of competence or sanity....

There are a wide variety of shorter-term prohibitions on gun ownership, including 10-year prohibitions for:

Any person convicted of a misdemeanor violation of the following: Penal Code sections 71, 76, 136 .5, 140, 148, subdivision (d), 171b, 171c, 171d, 186 .28, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244 .5, 245, 245 .5, 246, 246 .3, 247, 273 .5, 273 .6, 417, 417 .1, 417 .2, 417 .6, 422, 626 .9, 646 .9, 830 .95, subdivision (a), 17500, 17510, subdivision (a), 25300, 25800, 27510, 27590, subdivision (c), 30315, or 32625, and Welfare and Institutions Code sections 871 .5, 1001 .5, 8100, 8101, or 8103 .

Full copy of penal code here, was unable to provide separate links for every offense above in timely fashion.

And 5-year prohibitions for:

Any person taken into custody as a danger to self or others, assessed, and admitted to a mental health facility under Welfare and Institutions Code sections 5150, 5151, 5152; or certified under Welfare and Institutions Code sections 5250, 5260, 5270 .15 .

Other prohibitions on legal gun ownership cover people on probation, charged with a felony offense as yet unadjudicated, any voluntary mental patient or under "gravely disabled conservatorship," anyone "addicted to use of narcotics," anyone who threatened a licensed psychotherapist within 6 months, and anyone "under a protective order as defined in Family Code section 6218 or Penal Code section 136.2, or a temporary restraining order issued pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 527.6 or 527.8."

If you are not one of the prohibited, here are some of the laws you face regarding how to obtain a gun as a prospectively legal gun owner:

Only licensed California firearms dealers who possess a valid Certificate of Eligibility (COE) are authorized to engage in retail sales of firearms . These retail sales require the purchaser to provide personal identifier information for the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) document that the firearms dealer must submit to the DOJ . There is a mandatory 10-day waiting period before the firearms dealer can deliver the firearm to the purchaser ....

Generally, you have to be 18 to get a long gun, 21 for handgun. You must have a state driver's license or I.D. card. And there is no "gun show" or private sale "loophole" in the state:

Generally, it is illegal for any person who is not a California licensed firearms dealer (private party) to sell or transfer a firearm to another non-licensed person (private party) unless the sale is completed through a licensed California firearms dealer . A “Private Party Transfer” (PPT) can be conducted at any licensed California firearms dealership that sells handguns . The buyer and seller must complete the required DROS document in person at the licensed firearms dealership and deliver the firearm to the dealer who will retain possession of the firearm during the mandatory 10-day waiting period .

You can give a gun to a close family member and not go through that process.

You also have to have earned a state-issued "Handgun Safety Certificate" for legal handgun ownership purchasing, which requires that "you must score at least 75% on an objective written test pertaining to firearms laws and safety requirements," with tests "administered by DOJ Certified Instructors, who are generally located at firearms dealerships. An HSC is valid for five years." [UPDATE/CORRECTION: As of 2015, this requirement covers all weapons, not just handguns, and is now known as the "Firearms Safety Certificate."]

You must also "successfully perform a safe handling demonstration with the handgun being purchased or acquired. Safe handling demonstrations must be performed in the presence of a DOJ Certified Instructor sometime between the date the DROS is submitted to the DOJ and the delivery of the handgun, and are generally performed at the firearms dealership."

In addition, all guns bought in California legally "must be accompanied with a firearms safety device (FSD) that has passed required safety and functionality tests and is listed on the DOJ’s official roster of DOJ-approved firearm safety devices."


You can only buy one handgun every 30 days by law. You cannot buy a gun for a different person not going through the background check. If you move here with a previously owned weapon, you must inform the state DOJ or get rid of it.

As far as how you can legally use your weapon, here are some restrictions.

You may in general keep it in your own property or business (including temporary residences and campsites) if you legally own it, loaded or unloaded. You can generally legally transport handguns only unloaded and stored in a locked container, which can include your trunk. Long guns must be unloaded while transported.

As of this year, concealed weapons are banned on state schools and universities. As of last year, family members have a legal process to temporarily bar their relatives from getting guns if the family sees the member as unstable.

As far as having your weapon outside your home, business, or property, there are a set of restrictions:

It is illegal for any person to carry a handgun concealed upon his or her person or concealed in a vehicle without a license....The prohibition from carrying a concealed handgun does not apply to licensed hunters or fishermen while engaged in hunting or fishing, or while going to or returning from the hunting expedition. (Pen . Code, § 25640 .)...

It is illegal to carry a loaded firearm on one’s person or in a vehicle while in any public place, on any public street, or in any place where it is unlawful to discharge a firearm .....In order to determine whether a firearm is loaded, peace officers are authorized to examine any firearm carried by anyone on his or her person or in a vehicle while in any public place, on any public street or in any prohibited area of an unincorporated territory. Refusal to allow a peace officer to inspect a firearm pursuant to these provisions is, in itself, grounds for arrest . ....

It is generally illegal for any person to carry upon his or her person or in a vehicle, an exposed and unloaded handgun while in or on: • A public place or public street in an incorporated city or city and county; or • A public street in a prohibited area of an unincorporated city or city and county . ...

Getting that license to carry is up to local authorities, with varying requirements, and is in many areas very difficult to do. Only around 70,000 such licenses exist statewide, with around 29 million adults in the state.

3. Something you said in the past
4. Have a similar name to someone on the no-fly list
5. Not becoming an informant
6. Clerical error
8. Controversial Tweets

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Goose, serious question. Not being a dick. What is it you would like to do to stop these things from happening? I've asked you this before, but I don't think you really had an answer. All you do in these threads is say "no no no no no" but you never come up with your own ideas.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Even if you said "hey, maybe the no fly list would be a decent idea, but we're really going to have to tighten it up to make sure the right people are on the list" then maybe I could jive with that. (Or anything anyone else has put out there) If you tried to work with people. Instead you border on "this is acceptable to me and there's nothing to do about it at all" by just saying no to everything and not presenting any alternative ideas whatsoever.

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Goose, serious question. Not being a dick. What is it you would like to do to stop these things from happening? I've asked you this before, but I don't think you really had an answer. All you do in these threads is say "no no no no no" but you never come up with your own ideas.

Here's the thing, I accept that there is evil in the world and there is no way to ever stop things like this from happening. Reasonable limits? Yep, I'm all for them. And that's crux of my question above. California has a LOT of "reasonable limits" on buying guns, how many more can you come up with?

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Even if you said "hey, maybe the no fly list would be a decent idea, but we're really going to have to tighten it up to make sure the right people are on the list" then maybe I could jive with that. (Or anything anyone else has put out there) If you tried to work with people. Instead you border on "this is acceptable to me and there's nothing to do about it at all" by just saying no to everything and not presenting any alternative ideas whatsoever.

We already HAVE a system just like this in place - they're called background checks. What irritates me most is the parroting of stupid ideas like this. One person comes up with the "clever" thought that we don't let these people fly, we shouldn't let them buy guns and without any consideration of the legalities you have 200,000 monkeys parroting the same clever idea. And 99% of the time those are the same monkeys that are all about constitutional rights in any other situation but when it comes to guns it's "fuck those hillbillies they don't deserve the same rights as we do".

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

xsanguine wrote:I'm down for limiting and curtailing freedoms, Bob. That's usually the correct response. Who needs them, anyways?

It's time to stop this whole "free society" mess... because bad things happen and eventually we can eliminate them if an autonomous corporate enitty would just have the willpower to determine what property can own.

I"m all for freedom - for instance, I believe the innocent people murdered yesterday should be free to live their lives today.

crazy thought, right?

GRR Spartan wrote:"Thoughts and prayers" is being highlighted because too many pols have incorporated that phrase into a boiler plate response to these events going back to Gabby Giffords shooting almost 5 years ago. Used so much it's become trite.

The "thoughts and prayers" line is used like "Roll Tide" on the Tuscalosa campus.

As a gun owner I don't object not being able to buy Teflon coated ammo, background checks and requiring all gun dealers (including those "private citizens" who always seem to show up at gun shows sellng weapons to keep track f what they sell to whom and send it to a Federal/ state data base. The state knows what kind of vehicles I drive, knows I have a business. It's not a big deal if they know how many guns I own.