http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/18/charleston-church-shooting-nine-dead-after-hate-attack

Terrible. The shooter is still at large. Nine people dead so far.

Oh, brilliant, another hate-filled sociopath killing people. I wonder if the representative was the target, or if it was a random coincidence?

Oh hey, a white guy shooting up an African church in the South. I'm putting money on him being some flavor of white supremacist.

Great, a church of all things...

Scumbag of the lowest order.

Terrible. My thoughts and prayers are with the victims.

This is why owning firearms should be illegal

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

Only 5 posts in...

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

That's a little extreme, don'tcha' think. I mean, you can own firearms in the UK and Japan*, it's just a lot more restricted than here.

*IIRC

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

The perpetrator is also not allowed to murder people - that is illegal. Concealed carry in a church in SC is illegal (unless special permission is give in which case identifying the perpetrator should be much easier).

Firearms have many legitimate uses. To try and use the deaths of the church goers to push your agenda is extremely crass.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

That's a little extreme, don'tcha' think. I mean, you can own firearms in the UK and Japan*, it's just a lot more restricted than here.

*IIRC

True but (IMO) it's still wrong. Out of curiosity why is it that many Americans like to own firearms? I personally don't see the appeal or need to do so :L

SGTPozy wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

That's a little extreme, don'tcha' think. I mean, you can own firearms in the UK and Japan*, it's just a lot more restricted than here.

*IIRC

True but (IMO) it's still wrong. Out of curiosity why is it that many Americans like to own firearms? I personally don't see the appeal or need to do so :L

It's a cultural thing. Why not try to accept it, instead of attack it.

Firearms did not make this man murder anyone. He was the perpetrator.

The ownership of firearms or not, while probably an inevitable end point of this thread, can at least wait for a page or two while we find out what happened in the incident and why and see if the bloke gets caught at least? Up until that point, I'd almost be considering it off topic. Just leave that storm of gak for a wee while at least so we can learn about what happened without having to wade through all that. Sound good?

SGTPozy wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

That's a little extreme, don'tcha' think. I mean, you can own firearms in the UK and Japan*, it's just a lot more restricted than here.

*IIRC

True but (IMO) it's still wrong. Out of curiosity why is it that many Americans like to own firearms? I personally don't see the appeal or need to do so :L

People died here. Have you no decency sir?

 motyak wrote:
The ownership of firearms or not, while probably an inevitable end point of this thread, can at least wait for a page or two while we find out what happened in the incident and why and see if the bloke gets caught at least? Up until that point, I'd almost be considering it off topic. Just leave that storm of gak for a wee while at least so we can learn about what happened without having to wade through all that. Sound good?

Sounds good in theory, but it seems there's always anti-gun idiots waiting in the wings to take advantage of tragedies to push their bullgak agenda.

My thoughts and prayers to those affected. Truley heartbreaking event.

SGTPozy wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

That's a little extreme, don'tcha' think. I mean, you can own firearms in the UK and Japan*, it's just a lot more restricted than here.

*IIRC

True but (IMO) it's still wrong. Out of curiosity why is it that many Americans like to own firearms? I personally don't see the appeal or need to do so :L

Perfectly legal in UK, just need good reason and be of good character, pass the checks and security laws for storage. Police senior officer signs it off and your free to purchase a shotgun or rifle.

 jhe90 wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

That's a little extreme, don'tcha' think. I mean, you can own firearms in the UK and Japan*, it's just a lot more restricted than here.

*IIRC

True but (IMO) it's still wrong. Out of curiosity why is it that many Americans like to own firearms? I personally don't see the appeal or need to do so :L

Perfectly legal in UK, just need good reason and be of good character, pass the checks and security laws for storage. Police senior officer signs it off and your free to purchase a shotgun or rifle.

I own shot guns, rifles and carbines and I don't even hunt. I enjoy owning a replica I carried in OIF/OEF. I am a bad person to own so many weapons

Edit

Besides I need protection form the two escape killers on the East Coast. You never know if they make it to Washington state.

You need protection? I live in mid-state NY, I'm the one who needs protection here!

 jhe90 wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

That's a little extreme, don'tcha' think. I mean, you can own firearms in the UK and Japan*, it's just a lot more restricted than here.

*IIRC

True but (IMO) it's still wrong. Out of curiosity why is it that many Americans like to own firearms? I personally don't see the appeal or need to do so :L

Perfectly legal in UK, just need good reason and be of good character, pass the checks and security laws for storage. Police senior officer signs it off and your free to purchase a shotgun or rifle.

Indeed. Hopefully laws aren't tightened even further by the "I don't understand something so it should be illegal" crowd. That mindset is present in the US to a lesser degree but thankfully it faces strong opposition from those who support our Constitution.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
You need protection? I live in mid-state NY, I'm the one who needs protection here!

Aye Brother I know and I hoped to Gawd they're either caught or terminated soon before anyone gets hurt/killed by them. They planned this for a long damn time so I bet good money they're making for the Mexican border. Canada to damn obvious.

Edit

A freaking Church during a prayer service. What a damn work of art. The pic it looks like a punk and I hoped to Gawd its not a retaliation hit for LEO's predicament

NPR is reporting shooter was in the church for an hour before shooting started.

Wife works for a church. This is a personal nightmare for me. Blessing to the families.

That seems to be the scum bag in question.

Hopefully the catch him quickly and without other innocents getting capped.

feth, heard about this on the radio this morning. Tragic loss of life, I hope they catch him before anyone else gets hurt.

Any word on the motives yet, or is it too soon for that?

 -Shrike- wrote:
feth, heard about this on the radio this morning. Tragic loss of life, I hope they catch him before anyone else gets hurt.

Any word on the motives yet, or is it too soon for that?

I haven't heard anything yet, probably gonna have to catch him first and/or trawl his residence.

Likely the latter, as these fething nutjobs tend to not make it through confrontations.

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

Dear lord. Not sure if serious or trying to hijack a thread. If the former...shame on you. If the latter...shame on you.

Terrible tragedy that will further fuel the hatred of the blacks against whites and vice versa.

 Sigvatr wrote:


Terrible tragedy that will further fuel the hatred of the blacks against whites and vice versa.

I would honestly hope not.

I very seriously doubt there will be much sympathy for the gak bag murderer among the white community.

Unless the victims and black leaders decide to use this to further a racial agenda (and I pray they do not) I don't see it fueling race hate at all.

If we find out for sure racial hatred was a motivating factor for the donkey-cave perp, I would hope the actions serve as an example for how stupid and non=productive and outright destructive hatred can be.

Sigvatr wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

Dear lord. Not sure if serious or trying to hijack a thread. If the former...shame on you. If the latter...shame on you.

Yes, how does one dare to have a different opinion than almighty Sigvatr? Shame on him!

CptJake wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:


Terrible tragedy that will further fuel the hatred of the blacks against whites and vice versa.

I would honestly hope not.

I very seriously doubt there will be much sympathy for the gak bag murderer among the white community.

Unless the victims and black leaders decide to use this to further a racial agenda (and I pray they do not) I don't see it fueling race hate at all.

If we find out for sure racial hatred was a motivating factor for the donkey-cave perp, I would hope the actions serve as an example for how stupid and non=productive and outright destructive hatred can be.

I am afraid it is not going that way, people are not reasonable. Many black people will just see this as yet another episode in a very long list of black people being killed in the US for their skin colour. It will increase their feelings of unsafeness and 'all white people secretly hate us'.
Even if this shooting has no immediate effects, it is yet another drop in the bucket.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

CptJake wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:


Terrible tragedy that will further fuel the hatred of the blacks against whites and vice versa.

I would honestly hope not.

I very seriously doubt there will be much sympathy for the gak bag murderer among the white community.

Unless the victims and black leaders decide to use this to further a racial agenda (and I pray they do not) I don't see it fueling race hate at all.

If we find out for sure racial hatred was a motivating factor for the donkey-cave perp, I would hope the actions serve as an example for how stupid and non=productive and outright destructive hatred can be.

I am afraid it is not going that way, people are not reasonable. Many black people will just see this as yet another episode in a very long list of black people being killed in the US for their skin colour. It will increase their feelings of unsafeness and 'all white people secretly hate us'.
Even if this shooting has no immediate effects, it is yet another drop in the bucket.

Because racially motivated killings are totally not really a thing, and it's totally not making a very reasonable conclusion that this individual's target(a church with a historically black congregation) is racially motivated.

Not like there's still racism here in the southern US. Nope! Racism's over guys!

 Laughing Man wrote:
Oh hey, a white guy shooting up an African church in the South. I'm putting money on him being some flavor of white supremacist.

People "2nd amendment" each other here all the time...

It's a fact of life in the states at this point: 'Merica

This is why owning firearms should be illegal

Criminals anyway usually use illegal weapons for conspiracy, even if owning firearms is allowed.

 CptJake wrote:


Unless the victims and black leaders decide to use this to further a racial agenda (and I pray they do not) I don't see it fueling race hate at all.

If we find out for sure racial hatred was a motivating factor for the donkey-cave perp, I would hope the actions serve as an example for how stupid and non=productive and outright destructive hatred can be.

The entire Ferguson and similar police incidents in recent past have, sadly, shown that there's nothing rational about people's reactions. It's as irrational as it can be and a lot of people will gladly use the incident to further blame the police despite them not having anything to do with it.

I don't think 'blame the police' is gonna stick to this one. I just don;t see how it applies at all.

I know you say there is nothing rational about folk's reactions, but it does not seem like the type of incident anyone is going to point fingers at LEOs for.

 djones520 wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

That's a little extreme, don'tcha' think. I mean, you can own firearms in the UK and Japan*, it's just a lot more restricted than here.

*IIRC

True but (IMO) it's still wrong. Out of curiosity why is it that many Americans like to own firearms? I personally don't see the appeal or need to do so :L

It's a cultural thing. Why not try to accept it, instead of attack it.

Firearms did not make this man murder anyone. He was the perpetrator.

Because it might/could be a "Cultural think" like cutting people's heads off seems to be the current rage in the Middle East.

Not all Cultural Artifacts are either/both desirable, or good for the culture. Some happen to be incredibly bad for a culture or society (just look at Easter Island for the end-game of a society with fatal cultural norms).

MB

 Freakazoitt wrote:

This is why owning firearms should be illegal

Criminals anyway usually use illegal weapons for conspiracy, even if owning firearms is allowed.

Now don't start using facts here. "Common sense firearm laws" advocates disregard such things and encourage banning inanimate objects used in an illegal manner by a statistically insignificant portion of the population. That'll solve the crime problem!

[/sarcasm]

Can we take the firearm debate someplace else? This was a horrible crime. Please let's not use it to push an agenda.

May they rest in peace.

 Alex C wrote:

 Freakazoitt wrote:

This is why owning firearms should be illegal

Criminals anyway usually use illegal weapons for conspiracy, even if owning firearms is allowed.

Now don't start using facts here. "Common sense firearm laws" advocates disregard such things and encourage banning inanimate objects used in an illegal manner by a statistically insignificant portion of the population. That'll solve the crime problem!

[/sarcasm]

Rather misses the point.

Guns are not simply an inanimate object, they are a tool, designed and built with a specific purpose in mind (killing things more easily).

We tend to restrict things based upon the dangers posed by their use.

MB

Perp identified as Dylann Roof.

Previous arrests (apparently) for trespassing and drug charges.

Allegedly did have racial motivations based on what he told a survivor and based on pics of him with Apartheid era SA patches on a jacket.

Such tragedy.

I'm praying for the victims and their family and hoping this thug is apprehended soon.

BeAfraid wrote:

 Alex C wrote:

 Freakazoitt wrote:

This is why owning firearms should be illegal

Criminals anyway usually use illegal weapons for conspiracy, even if owning firearms is allowed.

Now don't start using facts here. "Common sense firearm laws" advocates disregard such things and encourage banning inanimate objects used in an illegal manner by a statistically insignificant portion of the population. That'll solve the crime problem!

[/sarcasm]

Rather misses the point.

Yes, "common sense firearm laws" people do miss the point. Glad you agree.

Anyway enough of that for now, back to the topic.

Yeah, can we at least leave the firearm discussion until the perpetrator is either apprehended or killed?

SGTPozy wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

That's a little extreme, don'tcha' think. I mean, you can own firearms in the UK and Japan*, it's just a lot more restricted than here.

*IIRC

True but (IMO) it's still wrong. Out of curiosity why is it that many Americans like to own firearms? I personally don't see the appeal or need to do so :L

Let no tragedy go to waste.

Sad to hear about this tragedy...hopefully this scumbag is caught and dealt with.

Sad to see this getting turned into a gun debate straight away. That was not my intention when I posted the thread.

I hope they catch the guy soon.

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

If firearms were illegal, the bad people will still find ways to obtain them. If someones willing to commit a crime, i'm betting they are also willing to illegally obtain a weapon. This would leave the majority of normal easygoing people defenseless. Imagine how many lives could have been saved if someone in that church was packing a gun and could have stopped him.

 Da Boss wrote:

I hope they catch the guy soon.

Hopefully, but I get the feeling he's not going to survive any encounter that takes place whenever the police do catch up to him.

CNN and Austin news reporting he has been caught.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/18/us/charleston-south-carolina-shooting/index.html

Fox reporting he was caught in North Carolina

Dylann Roof, the 21-year-old suspect in the deadly shooting Wednesday night at a Charleston church that left nine people dead, was captured in Shelby, North Carolina, which is over 240 miles northwest from the crime scene, reports say.

Color me surprised.

You can 3d print guns..

dereksatkinson wrote:
You can 3d print guns..

... so?

Now it'll be used racially since he was taken alive....

 Hulksmash wrote:
Now it'll be used racially since he was taken alive....

Huh?

 Frazzled wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

That's a little extreme, don'tcha' think. I mean, you can own firearms in the UK and Japan*, it's just a lot more restricted than here.

*IIRC

True but (IMO) it's still wrong. Out of curiosity why is it that many Americans like to own firearms? I personally don't see the appeal or need to do so :L

People died here. Have you no decency sir?

Clearly not. As a fellow Brit, I would like to say to that poster: 'Stop being a knob, mate.'


There's a time and a place. Condolences to all affected by this.

Shooter has been apprehended in North Carolina.

I was kind of hoping that the scumbag would resist arrest and be killed by the police, tends to make the suffering end sooner

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
Now it'll be used racially since he was taken alive....

Huh?

He's suggesting that there will be claims of "race bias" since the suspect was white and brought in alive, yet in similar instances where the suspect has been African-American they get shot.

I sincerely doubt there will be claims of such, at least no serious claims.

To be fair this sort of thing happens so frequently here (as does violent crime in general) that you become sort of numb to it and jaded about it.

Its more shocking if a day goes by in which you DON'T hear an account of some violent horrible behavior taking place locally/nationally (gun-based or otherwise).

Welcome to Thunderdome...

BeAfraid wrote:
Rather misses the point.

Guns are not simply an inanimate object, they are a tool, designed and built with a specific purpose in mind (killing things more easily).

We tend to restrict things based upon the dangers posed by their use.

MB

I think one of our moderators very politely asked that this line of discussion be refrained from. Perhaps this advice should be heeded.

dereksatkinson wrote:
You can 3d print guns..

You can. And people have also made other forms of improvised firearms long before 3D printers. But it does not appear that the weapon used was homemade so it seems tangentially related to the conversation at best.

 CT GAMER wrote:
To be fair this sort of thing happens so frequently here (as does violent crime in general) that you become sort of numb to it and jaded about it.

Its more shocking if a day goes by in which you DON'T hear an account of some violent horrible behavior taking place locally/nationally (gun-based or otherwise).

I would like to think that given the Dakka community's reaction to this that the cast majority of us have not reached this point.

 AdeptSister wrote:
Can we take the firearm debate someplace else? This was a horrible crime. Please let's not use it to push an agenda.

May they rest in peace.

I think that this bears repeating.

And I think rather than continually rehashing the point, click the yellow triangle and reply to the topic at hand.

 Hulksmash wrote:
Now it'll be used racially since he was taken alive....

Which is ridiculous, considering that the DC Snipers were child-killing black Muslims and they were taken in alive...

I've just watched Obama do a press conference on this. I've seen him do a lot of speeches/conferences over the years, but he looked really annoyed this time, more angrier than I've ever seen him. He knew some of the people down at that church, so that probably explains his mood.

Anyway, to sum up. Obama said he was fed up doing these type of conferences after mass shootings, and would like to do more about preventing mass shootings in the future, but his hands are tied by the usual suspects.

Make of that what you will.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
Now it'll be used racially since he was taken alive....

Which is ridiculous, considering that the DC Snipers were child-killing black Muslims and they were taken in alive...

Common sense doesn't matter, only mass media coverage and opinion

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Obama said he was fed up doing these type of conferences after mass shootings

He can always resign.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
and would like to do more about preventing mass shootings in the future

Encouraging people to take responsibility for themselves and take measures to effectively defend themselves would be a good start.

That guy had a lot of crap in his head. That's the main reason, not a gun (but of course, it was too easy to obtain a gun for him too.

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
Now it'll be used racially since he was taken alive....

Which is ridiculous, considering that the DC Snipers were child-killing black Muslims and they were taken in alive...

Common sense doesn't matter, only mass media coverage and opinion

This.

I'm not saying it was racial he was taken alive. Just saying someone is going to bring it up because it's easy to sensationalize. Not saying it's going to be valid (I doubt it is and will be 99% sure of it once we see the circumstances) but I am saying someone will bring up a black man died being apprehended for selling cigarettes and a white kid who killed 9 black people was taken alive.

The vast majority of people like this are taken alive unless they suicide by cop. But that won't stop our media

 Alex C wrote:
He can always resign.

Wouldn't it be better to not have as many mass shootings instead? Hell, I'm not the President and I'm tired of this kind of lunacy.

I personally feel our countries would be better off without the type of mass media coverage we have. Some girl gets kicked out of class for wearing provocative clothing and the media makes her into some kind of hero instead of a rule disobeying tramp.

Some guy gets gunned down because he is assaulting a police officer and the media turns it into a racially motivated murder.

I am not saying these things don't happen (the racially motivated murder) but it would be nice if the media didn't jump to conclusions before the facts were released.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Alex C wrote:
He can always resign.

Wouldn't it be better to not have as many mass shootings instead? Hell, I'm not the President and I'm tired of this kind of lunacy.

From a June 15th article:

Over the past weekend, from 3:00 p.m. Friday through 6:00 a.m. Monday, at least 24 people were wounded in shootings. Besides the three gun-related murders over the weekend, there was one homicide resulting from a stabbing. The violence, according to CBS News, covers a range of ages – from teens to a person in his 60s. Not much is known about the shooters when they are still at large, obviously, but as for the victims, some are said to be gang members while others are innocent bystanders standing around or sitting in cars.

Seems 'mass shootings', as heinous as they are, are not the real problem when it comes to violent gun deaths. The vast majority of criminal gun deaths are not 'mass shootings'.

http://www.examiner.com/article/chicago-shootings-homicides-skyrocket-june-11-of-last-12-days-had-murders

I personally feel our countries would be better off without the type of mass media coverage we have

I'm not sure it's possible now. Like in USSR before 1980s?

 Ahtman wrote:

 Alex C wrote:
He can always resign.

Wouldn't it be better to not have as many mass shootings instead? Hell, I'm not the President and I'm tired of this kind of lunacy.

He said he was tired of making the speeches. If he'd feth off, he wouldn't have to.

But that would leave Biden in charge *shudder*

He said he was tired of making the speeches. If he'd feth off, he wouldn't have to.

No, he said he was TIRED of making speeches about the aftermath of a mass shooting, and not being able to do anything about it.

Example. If an American embassy is attacked overseas, or US troops targeted in Iraq or Afghanistan, then Obama can say fire the cruise missiles, or send in the airstrikes against the training camps, or Joe Biden can meet a foreign minister etc etc.

He knows what he can do in response, and 9 times out of 10, he can actually implement a response. It's different for these types of incidents. They're complex problems that require tough solutions.

But I'm not going to lecture Americans on what they should do. Only Americans can solve American problems.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

He knows what he can do in response, and 9 times out of 10, he can actually implement a response. It's different for these types of incidents. They're complex problems that require tough solutions.

And a shooting done locally by an individual should never be a federal matter (unless a federal judge/agent was the victim or it took place on a federal installation) , let alone one POTUS should be able to act upon. At most, providing federal LE support to forensics and other aspects of the investigation IF the counties/municipalities/states request it is a good role. If the state prosecutors decide it is beneficial to seek federal charges, then another federal role opens up. But I suspect South Carolina has plenty of laws on the books which will prove appropriate to charge this crap bag, and provide proper sentencing if he is convicted.

Obama can't really do anything to stop these sorts of shootings. The desire to go out and shoot a whole bunch of people like that is likely rooted in pretty deep social or cultural problems. Even if the laws were changed, the culture would not be. That's how I see it, anyhow.

I think it became a Federal case because he fled across state lines. That IIRC automatically means the FBI gets involved.

 Da Boss wrote:
Obama can't really do anything to stop these sorts of shootings.

No one can, but we should all be tired of violence regardless of whether we are President or not. It just seems odd that if our choice is less people shooting other people and "the President can feth off" that people would choose the latter over the former as being better. It seems less like being upset at the shooting and more about hating the President, which is fairly sad.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I think it became a Federal case because he fled across state lines. That IIRC automatically means the FBI gets involved.

FBI was already involved and so was the DOJ. DOJ is trying to say it was a hate crime which they are allowed to prosecute and the FBI is in it because SC asked for help finding the bugger

 Grey Templar wrote:
I think it became a Federal case because he fled across state lines. That IIRC automatically means the FBI gets involved.

Maybe. There are many many cases where two states work it out (really the majority). NC will have an extradition relationship with SC. If it was a kidnapping and the victim was moved across state lines the feds are a lot more likely to step in. In this case, there won't be much justification for that. Of course, DOJ has stepped in a lot of places they should not over the years...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I think it became a Federal case because he fled across state lines. That IIRC automatically means the FBI gets involved.

FBI was already involved and so was the DOJ. DOJ is trying to say it was a hate crime which they are allowed to prosecute and the FBI is in it because SC asked for help finding the bugger

Help in the man hunt and investigation is different from SC giving up the prosecution.

 CptJake wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I think it became a Federal case because he fled across state lines. That IIRC automatically means the FBI gets involved.

Maybe. There are many many cases where two states work it out (really the majority). NC will have an extradition relationship with SC. If it was a kidnapping and the victim was moved across state lines the feds are a lot more likely to step in. In this case, there won't be much justification for that. Of course, DOJ has stepped in a lot of places they should not over the years...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I think it became a Federal case because he fled across state lines. That IIRC automatically means the FBI gets involved.

FBI was already involved and so was the DOJ. DOJ is trying to say it was a hate crime which they are allowed to prosecute and the FBI is in it because SC asked for help finding the bugger

Help in the man hunt and investigation is different from SC giving up the prosecution.

was simply pointing out that both the FBI and DOJ have been involved from the start

 CptJake wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

He knows what he can do in response, and 9 times out of 10, he can actually implement a response. It's different for these types of incidents. They're complex problems that require tough solutions.

And a shooting done locally by an individual should never be a federal matter (unless a federal judge/agent was the victim or it took place on a federal installation) , let alone one POTUS should be able to act upon. At most, providing federal LE support to forensics and other aspects of the investigation IF the counties/municipalities/states request it is a good role. If the state prosecutors decide it is beneficial to seek federal charges, then another federal role opens up. But I suspect South Carolina has plenty of laws on the books which will prove appropriate to charge this crap bag, and provide proper sentencing if he is convicted.

I was thinking more along the lines of passing legislation on gun control, background checks being tightened up, that sort of thing.

As a matter of interest, where does South Carolina stand on the death penalty? Do they have it or not?

 Ahtman wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Obama can't really do anything to stop these sorts of shootings.

No one can, but we should all be tired of violence regardless of whether we are President or not. It just seems odd that if our choice is less people shooting other people and "the President can feth off" that people would choose the latter over the former as being better. It seems less like being upset at the shooting and more about hating the President, which is fairly sad.

I agree, I was more making the point that Obama is probably pretty frustrated that as the most powerful man in the world, he can do so little to change this. His speech makes that frustration clear, and I think discussing him other than that is a bit of a sideline.

I know right. If only it weren't a constitutional republic but a nice banana republic instead.

SGTPozy wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

That's a little extreme, don'tcha' think. I mean, you can own firearms in the UK and Japan*, it's just a lot more restricted than here.

*IIRC

True but (IMO) it's still wrong. Out of curiosity why is it that many Americans like to own firearms? I personally don't see the appeal or need to do so :L

WELL... for hunting, pleasure use, and self defense... Main reason why we have the "right to bear arms" Is to defend ourselves from our own government if it turned against us like taking away our rights and freedoms...

I think its hard for British people to get that (no offence)

 zombiekila707 wrote:
for hunting, pleasure use, and self defense...

I don't think you should rub yourself with a firearm like that.

Ask catholics in Northern Ireland how defending yourself from your own government goes. I think the British have more direct experience of that than the Americans, which is why they are less ideological about it.

 Frazzled wrote:
I know right. If only it weren't a constitutional republic but a nice banana republic instead.

What's your beef with Banana republics? Great weather, dictators always have great uniforms, and the chance to spout anti-American propaganda

NBC is reporting this scumbag is captured.

 Ahtman wrote:

 zombiekila707 wrote:
for hunting, pleasure use, and self defense...

I don't think you should rub yourself with a firearm like that.

Thats why its critical that your firearm has just the right amount of gun oil.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

He knows what he can do in response, and 9 times out of 10, he can actually implement a response. It's different for these types of incidents. They're complex problems that require tough solutions.

And a shooting done locally by an individual should never be a federal matter (unless a federal judge/agent was the victim or it took place on a federal installation) , let alone one POTUS should be able to act upon. At most, providing federal LE support to forensics and other aspects of the investigation IF the counties/municipalities/states request it is a good role. If the state prosecutors decide it is beneficial to seek federal charges, then another federal role opens up. But I suspect South Carolina has plenty of laws on the books which will prove appropriate to charge this crap bag, and provide proper sentencing if he is convicted.

I was thinking more along the lines of passing legislation on gun control, background checks being tightened up, that sort of thing.

As a matter of interest, where does South Carolina stand on the death penalty? Do they have it or not?

I know what you were getting at. And my answer still fits.

South Carolina does have the death penalty, but it is rarely carried out even when a perp is given death as a penalty.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
I know right. If only it weren't a constitutional republic but a nice banana republic instead.

What's your beef with Banana republics? Great weather, dictators always have great uniforms, and the chance to spout anti-American propaganda

Banana envy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CptJake wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

He knows what he can do in response, and 9 times out of 10, he can actually implement a response. It's different for these types of incidents. They're complex problems that require tough solutions.

And a shooting done locally by an individual should never be a federal matter (unless a federal judge/agent was the victim or it took place on a federal installation) , let alone one POTUS should be able to act upon. At most, providing federal LE support to forensics and other aspects of the investigation IF the counties/municipalities/states request it is a good role. If the state prosecutors decide it is beneficial to seek federal charges, then another federal role opens up. But I suspect South Carolina has plenty of laws on the books which will prove appropriate to charge this crap bag, and provide proper sentencing if he is convicted.

I was thinking more along the lines of passing legislation on gun control, background checks being tightened up, that sort of thing.

As a matter of interest, where does South Carolina stand on the death penalty? Do they have it or not?

I know what you were getting at. And my answer still fits.

South Carolina does have the death penalty, but it is rarely carried out even when a perp is given death as a penalty.

Churches are gun free zones in South Carolina, except by express permission of the pastor.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 zombiekila707 wrote:
for hunting, pleasure use, and self defense...

I don't think you should rub yourself with a firearm like that.

Thats why its critical that your firearm has just the right amount of gun oil.

Needs LOTS of gun oil...

But seriously! It is lots of fun shooting cans or other targets (in a safe and controlled environment)

 Da Boss wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Obama can't really do anything to stop these sorts of shootings.

No one can, but we should all be tired of violence regardless of whether we are President or not. It just seems odd that if our choice is less people shooting other people and "the President can feth off" that people would choose the latter over the former as being better. It seems less like being upset at the shooting and more about hating the President, which is fairly sad.

I agree, I was more making the point that Obama is probably pretty frustrated that as the most powerful man in the world, he can do so little to change this. His speech makes that frustration clear, and I think discussing him other than that is a bit of a sideline.

Yep.

Sadly, the NRA has way more political clout than the freaking President of the United States thanks to their methods of fearmongering and the people that support the NRA vote with emotion rather than intelligence.

 Frazzled wrote:
CNN and Austin news reporting he has been caught.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/18/us/charleston-south-carolina-shooting/index.html

Fox reporting he was caught in North Carolina

Dylann Roof, the 21-year-old suspect in the deadly shooting Wednesday night at a Charleston church that left nine people dead, was captured in Shelby, North Carolina, which is over 240 miles northwest from the crime scene, reports say.

Good catch by the police. That story reads like this guy is either part of a hate group or completely off his rocker. Either way, he's a jackass and I'm glad they caught him.

What a horrible thing to do to people and their families.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Obama can't really do anything to stop these sorts of shootings.

No one can, but we should all be tired of violence regardless of whether we are President or not. It just seems odd that if our choice is less people shooting other people and "the President can feth off" that people would choose the latter over the former as being better. It seems less like being upset at the shooting and more about hating the President, which is fairly sad.

I agree, I was more making the point that Obama is probably pretty frustrated that as the most powerful man in the world, he can do so little to change this. His speech makes that frustration clear, and I think discussing him other than that is a bit of a sideline.

Yep.

Sadly, the NRA has way more political clout than the freaking President of the United States thanks to their methods of fearmongering and the people that support the NRA vote with emotion rather than intelligence.

You got that backwards. Its gun control advocates who vote with emotion and not intelligence, since the facts don't support their views.

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

I could make the same comment about alcohol since it kills more people a year in the U.S. than guns.

I have not seen any affiliation to a specific hate group (or groups), but it is still early in the investigation. I would think that the Social Media proficient media types would have grabbed onto any affiliations indicated (implicitly or explicitly ) if they had a shred of electronic evidence. Clearly the kid was a racist turd.

We'll see what the cops find out. I wouldn't expect them to release too much prior to trial though. What ever the media can get hold of will be what fuels the public reaction, we can just hope the fuel is at least somewhat accurate.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Obama can't really do anything to stop these sorts of shootings.

No one can, but we should all be tired of violence regardless of whether we are President or not. It just seems odd that if our choice is less people shooting other people and "the President can feth off" that people would choose the latter over the former as being better. It seems less like being upset at the shooting and more about hating the President, which is fairly sad.

I agree, I was more making the point that Obama is probably pretty frustrated that as the most powerful man in the world, he can do so little to change this. His speech makes that frustration clear, and I think discussing him other than that is a bit of a sideline.

Yep.

Sadly, the NRA has way more political clout than the freaking President of the United States thanks to their methods of fearmongering and the people that support the NRA vote with emotion rather than intelligence.

You got that backwards. Its gun control advocates who vote with emotion and not intelligence, since the facts don't support their views.

Yeah...it's really not.

Have gun control advocates gotten politicians removed from office for even PROPOSING less stringent measures?

No?

How about we say that both sides have groups that act stupidly and not use this tragedy as a piece of political leverage?

Relapse wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

I could make the same comment about alcohol since it kills more people a year in the U.S. than guns.

You forgot that "alcohol" by itself does not "kill more people a year in the U.S. than guns".

It's the irresponsible operation of motor vehicles coupled with alcohol which does so.

But you know this, as you continually bring this strawman into threads whenever someone even dares impinge upon your precious firearms.

 kronk wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
CNN and Austin news reporting he has been caught.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/18/us/charleston-south-carolina-shooting/index.html

Fox reporting he was caught in North Carolina

Dylann Roof, the 21-year-old suspect in the deadly shooting Wednesday night at a Charleston church that left nine people dead, was captured in Shelby, North Carolina, which is over 240 miles northwest from the crime scene, reports say.

Good catch by the police. That story reads like this guy is either part of a hate group or completely off his rocker. Either way, he's a jackass and I'm glad they caught him.

What a horrible thing to do to people and their families.

I'd proffer to be part of a hate group is to be off your rocker (unless you hate cats, in which its a sane group).

 Kanluwen wrote:

Relapse wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

I could make the same comment about alcohol since it kills more people a year in the U.S. than guns.

You forgot that "alcohol" by itself does not "kill more people a year in the U.S. than guns".

It's the irresponsible operation of motor vehicles coupled with alcohol which does so.

But you know this, as you continually bring this strawman into threads whenever someone even dares impinge upon your precious firearms.

As many people die because of drunk drivers as gun incidents. There are tens of thousands more who die because of other alcohol related incidents. Hardly the straw man you pretend it is, but real data.

 Alex C wrote:

Encouraging people to take responsibility for themselves and take measures to effectively defend themselves would be a good start.

Yeah, how DARE they get shot to death like that?!

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Obama can't really do anything to stop these sorts of shootings.

No one can, but we should all be tired of violence regardless of whether we are President or not. It just seems odd that if our choice is less people shooting other people and "the President can feth off" that people would choose the latter over the former as being better. It seems less like being upset at the shooting and more about hating the President, which is fairly sad.

I agree, I was more making the point that Obama is probably pretty frustrated that as the most powerful man in the world, he can do so little to change this. His speech makes that frustration clear, and I think discussing him other than that is a bit of a sideline.

Yep.

Sadly, the NRA has way more political clout than the freaking President of the United States thanks to their methods of fearmongering and the people that support the NRA vote with emotion rather than intelligence.

You got that backwards. Its gun control advocates who vote with emotion and not intelligence, since the facts don't support their views.

Yeah...it's really not.

Have gun control advocates gotten politicians removed from office for even PROPOSING less stringent measures?

No?

Colorado

Edit
Might have misread

Relapse wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Relapse wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

I could make the same comment about alcohol since it kills more people a year in the U.S. than guns.

You forgot that "alcohol" by itself does not "kill more people a year in the U.S. than guns".

It's the irresponsible operation of motor vehicles coupled with alcohol which does so.

But you know this, as you continually bring this strawman into threads whenever someone even dares impinge upon your precious firearms.

As many people die because of drunk drivers as gun incidents. There are a few thousand more with other alcohol related incidents. Hardly the straw man you pretend it is, but real data.

Your statement was ALCOHOL.

Not "drunk drivers", not "traffic fatalities", not anything but ALCOHOL.

So yes, it is a strawman argument. To continually post that "alcohol kills more people a year in the U.S. than guns" is a strawman argument and I am bloody sick and tired of seeing it in any thread discussing any kind of high profile shooting. It should be on the flippin' Dakka Bingo Card by this point because it is as inevitable as someone Godwinning the flippin' thread.


And with that, I'm leaving this discussion. Glad he got caught and hope that he gets prosecuted to the full extent of the law; but I'm not getting involved in another of these circle jerks for gun nuts.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Relapse wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

I could make the same comment about alcohol since it kills more people a year in the U.S. than guns.

You forgot that "alcohol" by itself does not "kill more people a year in the U.S. than guns".

It's the irresponsible operation of motor vehicles coupled with alcohol which does so.

But you know this, as you continually bring this strawman into threads whenever someone even dares impinge upon your precious firearms.

It is not guns by themselves that kill people it is the irresponsible operation of guns coupled with morons that kills people

Your argument kanluwen is so full of holes it is ridiculous just drop it.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Relapse wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

I could make the same comment about alcohol since it kills more people a year in the U.S. than guns.

You forgot that "alcohol" by itself does not "kill more people a year in the U.S. than guns".

It's the irresponsible operation of motor vehicles coupled with alcohol which does so.

But you know this, as you continually bring this strawman into threads whenever someone even dares impinge upon your precious firearms.

As many people die because of drunk drivers as gun incidents. There are a few thousand more with other alcohol related incidents. Hardly the straw man you pretend it is, but real data.

Your statement was ALCOHOL.

Not "drunk drivers", not "traffic fatalities", not anything but ALCOHOL.

So yes, it is a strawman argument. To continually post that "alcohol kills more people a year in the U.S. than guns" is a strawman argument and I am bloody sick and tired of seeing it in any thread discussing any kind of high profile shooting. It should be on the flippin' Dakka Bingo Card by this point because it is as inevitable as someone Godwinning the flippin' thread.


And with that, I'm leaving this discussion. Glad he got caught and hope that he gets prosecuted to the full extent of the law; but I'm not getting involved in another of these circle jerks for gun nuts.

Kind of went off the handle there didn't you sport.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Relapse wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

I could make the same comment about alcohol since it kills more people a year in the U.S. than guns.

You forgot that "alcohol" by itself does not "kill more people a year in the U.S. than guns".

It's the irresponsible operation of motor vehicles coupled with alcohol which does so.

But you know this, as you continually bring this strawman into threads whenever someone even dares impinge upon your precious firearms.

As many people die because of drunk drivers as gun incidents. There are a few thousand more with other alcohol related incidents. Hardly the straw man you pretend it is, but real data.

Your statement was ALCOHOL.

Not "drunk drivers", not "traffic fatalities", not anything but ALCOHOL.

So yes, it is a strawman argument. To continually post that "alcohol kills more people a year in the U.S. than guns" is a strawman argument and I am bloody sick and tired of seeing it in any thread discussing any kind of high profile shooting. It should be on the flippin' Dakka Bingo Card by this point because it is as inevitable as someone Godwinning the flippin' thread.


And with that, I'm leaving this discussion. Glad he got caught and hope that he gets prosecuted to the full extent of the law; but I'm not getting involved in another of these circle jerks for gun nuts.

Probably good because you don't have a clue what you're talking about and move the goalposts as a result.

Alcohol, donuts, guns, stampeding cows, and OJ Simpson all fething kill people. However, those discussion can be made elsewhere.

This thread is about the 9 poor bastards that got killed in a church by a sick-in-the-head donkey-cave.

 curran12 wrote:
How about we say that both sides have groups that act stupidly and not use this tragedy as a piece of political leverage?

Indeed....

For or against gun control really have no bearing in this discussion, unless you're advocating a total ban... which is a non-starter here in the states.

Here's the thing we should be talking about... We should NOT be glorifying the shooter (ala, Tsarnev)... I don't care about his beliefs. I don't care about the "bigger picture" because there is none.

Simply stated, there is evil in this world.

If shooting people as they prayed in their own church isn't evil, then when need to just pack it all in.

As a recent convert to being anti-death penalty, I find myself to seriously question my stance... as just like Tsarnev, death is the only fitting punishment for these atrocity.

All I want to hear about this guy is he's be found guilty and justice is served. No Rollingstones/TIMES front page article.

Just a cold, dank cell for him.

 kronk wrote:
Alcohol, donuts, guns, stampeding cows, and OJ Simpson all fething kill people. However, those discussion can be made elsewhere.

This thread is about the 9 poor bastards that got killed in a church by a sick-in-the-head donkey-cave.

True. My apologies.

 kronk wrote:
Alcohol, donuts, guns, stampeding cows, and OJ Simpson all fething kill people. However, those discussion can be made elsewhere.

This thread is about the 9 poor bastards that got killed in a church by a sick-in-the-head donkey-cave.

Agreed.

Any more word on the actual shooter at this point?

EDIT:
Yea, this is creepy. Was stalking a store. Got kicked out. Came back a month later and was arrested. Read the police report.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/06/18/415506320/what-we-know-so-far-about-accused-church-gunman-dylann-roof

Sounds like he may have not been able to buy a gun legally at this point due to prior convictions but I am not certain.

 Frazzled wrote:

 kronk wrote:
Alcohol, donuts, guns, stampeding cows, and OJ Simpson all fething kill people. However, those discussion can be made elsewhere.

This thread is about the 9 poor bastards that got killed in a church by a sick-in-the-head donkey-cave.

Agreed.

Any more word on the actual shooter at this point?

I suspect the NC LEOs are keeping him in a less than comfortable room while the SC prosecutors work up the extradition paperwork for the judge to sign. Hopefully this evening the SC troopers take custody and bring him back to SC for his arraignment.

kinda weird he didnt make a fight of it though isnt it?

I mean he just killed a church full of people...literally. He is going to face the death penalty or life in prison at the least, im surprised he didn't go out in a blaze of glory.

before haters attack my post though, im not advocating going out in a blaze of glory I am merely pointing out how perplexing it is that he didnt with the odds stacked against him in such a matter.

The trespassing conviction sounds like a misdemeanor, right?

The first time I heard about this I was shocked and saddened by this tragedy of it but I missed the description of who did it. The next time it was repeated on the radio, when they were about to describe the suspect, I remember thinking "Please don't be a white guy please don't be a white guy- Dammit."

This must be how American Muslims feel.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
kinda weird he didnt make a fight of it though isnt it?

I mean he just killed a church full of people...literally. He is going to face the death penalty or life in prison at the least, im surprised he didn't go out in a blaze of glory.

before haters attack my post though, im not advocating going out in a blaze of glory I am merely pointing out how perplexing it is that he didnt with the odds stacked against him in such a matter.

The gak bag who gunned down folks watching Batman in Colorado waited nicely for the cops too. Once the incident is over, perps like this don't always choose to fight it out. It is when they are interrupted during their act that they often put up enough of a fight to justify capping them.

 CptJake wrote:
The trespassing conviction sounds like a misdemeanor, right?

Looks like he got popped for drugs at the same time.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Relapse wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
This is why owning firearms should be illegal

I could make the same comment about alcohol since it kills more people a year in the U.S. than guns.

You forgot that "alcohol" by itself does not "kill more people a year in the U.S. than guns".

It's the irresponsible operation of motor vehicles coupled with alcohol which does so.

But you know this, as you continually bring this strawman into threads whenever someone even dares impinge upon your precious firearms.

ironic, considering you just used the "alcohol doesn't kill people, people who drink alcohol kill people" argument


but at least you used the word straw man in your argument, that makes it totally legit







lets try to keep OT




I really hope this is just some lone madman who will soon be caught, such a ridiculous tragedy.

Im glad we live in the most peaceful times ever and heinous acts like this are relatively rare, but I still cannot get how someone has enough hate in their heart to actually do something like this.

 Frazzled wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
The trespassing conviction sounds like a misdemeanor, right?

Looks like he got popped for drugs at the same time.

The trespassing arrest he was convicted for was trespassing way after the incident he got banned from the mall and caught with the drugs if I read the link right.

And I didn't see where he was convicted for the drug charge.

The reason I'm curious is Daddy gave him a .45 for his B-Day. If the conviction was a felony conviction that would indicate legal ramifications for Daddy. Poor judgement giving your kid with any arrest record a gun (I would not, and I have given guns as gifts).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 easysauce wrote:

I really hope this is just some lone madman who will soon be caught, such a ridiculous tragedy.

You're a bit late...

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
The trespassing conviction sounds like a misdemeanor, right?

Looks like he got popped for drugs at the same time.

The trespassing arrest he was convicted for was trespassing way after the incident he got banned from the mall and caught with the drugs if I read the link right.

And I didn't see where he was convicted for the drug charge.

The reason I'm curious is Daddy gave him a .45 for his B-Day. If the conviction was a felony conviction that would indicate legal ramifications for Daddy. Poor judgement giving your kid with any arrest record a gun (I would not, and I have given guns as gifts).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 easysauce wrote:

I really hope this is just some lone madman who will soon be caught, such a ridiculous tragedy.

You're a bit late...

I would say so, glad they caught him though.


IM a bit upset that yet another repeat offender was allowed to repeatedly offend though.

 CptJake wrote:


The reason I'm curious is Daddy gave him a .45 for his B-Day. If the conviction was a felony conviction that would indicate legal ramifications for Daddy. Poor judgement giving your kid with any arrest record a gun (I would not, and I have given guns as gifts).

Agreed.

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
The trespassing conviction sounds like a misdemeanor, right?

Looks like he got popped for drugs at the same time.

The trespassing arrest he was convicted for was trespassing way after the incident he got banned from the mall and caught with the drugs if I read the link right.

And I didn't see where he was convicted for the drug charge.

The reason I'm curious is Daddy gave him a .45 for his B-Day. If the conviction was a felony conviction that would indicate legal ramifications for Daddy. Poor judgement giving your kid with any arrest record a gun (I would not, and I have given guns as gifts).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 easysauce wrote:

I really hope this is just some lone madman who will soon be caught, such a ridiculous tragedy.

You're a bit late...

It's entirely possible that if he'd moved away from family, he could have hidden the arrest from them.

Yes indeed. Difficult to ferret out and I don't know SC's laws on handguns.

Report is creepy as hell though.

 -Shrike- wrote:

It's entirely possible that if he'd moved away from family, he could have hidden the arrest from them.

Someone bailed him out and paid his legal fees. At his age, as a jobless youth, that tends to be family.

So how long until this is labeled an act of terrorism?

 skyth wrote:
So how long until this is labeled an act of terrorism?

Why would it be?

If he was given a Colt M1911 A1 that he used in the shootings he must have been a very good shot and also reloaded at least once. Surely there would have been an opportunity for the congregation to return fire with their own weapons?

remember this isn't terrorism its domestic terrorism.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If he was given a Colt M1911 A1 that he used in the shootings he must have been a very good shot and also reloaded at least once. Surely there would have been an opportunity for the congregation to return fire with their own weapons?

Not entirely sure if KK here is trolling or not. Or if the misconception that every American walks around with a gun is that prevalent.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If he was given a Colt M1A1 that he used in the shootings he must have been a very good shot and also reloaded at least once. Surely there would have been an opportunity for the congregation to return fire with their own weapons?

If you read a few of the linked articles you would know he did reload. And if you bothered to read the posts in the topic you would know churches in SC are 'gun free zones', where you cannot legally have a gun.

But then, that would kind of take away the impact of your point.

 CptJake wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If he was given a Colt M1A1 that he used in the shootings he must have been a very good shot and also reloaded at least once. Surely there would have been an opportunity for the congregation to return fire with their own weapons?

If you read a few of the linked articles you would know he did reload. And if you bothered to read the posts in the topic you would know churches in SC are 'gun free zones', where you cannot legally have a gun.

But then, that would kind of take away the impact of your point.

If it was illegal to have a gun in church why was this guy carrying one?

 kronk wrote:

 CptJake wrote:


The reason I'm curious is Daddy gave him a .45 for his B-Day. If the conviction was a felony conviction that would indicate legal ramifications for Daddy. Poor judgement giving your kid with any arrest record a gun (I would not, and I have given guns as gifts).

Agreed.

this is why the only major law that needs tightening is the few instances of sales of firearms where no BG check is made. I think even in private sales there should at least be a # to call, run their drivers license or ID through, get a yes no answer to do they have a criminal background, and then continue with the sale after a 5-20 min phone call (assuming no record of course)

the states really has good gun laws, IE no guns for crooks, its just that enforcement of these laws is a bit slap dash so we have loopholes like this unfortunately.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CptJake wrote:

 skyth wrote:
So how long until this is labeled an act of terrorism?

Why would it be?

it really shouldnt be, but it probably will be. because reasons.

also fear, panic, terror.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
If he was given a Colt M1A1 that he used in the shootings he must have been a very good shot and also reloaded at least once. Surely there would have been an opportunity for the congregation to return fire with their own weapons?

If you read a few of the linked articles you would know he did reload. And if you bothered to read the posts in the topic you would know churches in SC are 'gun free zones', where you cannot legally have a gun.

But then, that would kind of take away the impact of your point.

If it was illegal to have a gun in church why was this guy carrying one?

It would seem criminals don't always obey laws. Go figure.

It would also seem the majority of the mass shootings occur in 'gun free zones'. Again, go figure.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 easysauce wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 CptJake wrote:


The reason I'm curious is Daddy gave him a .45 for his B-Day. If the conviction was a felony conviction that would indicate legal ramifications for Daddy. Poor judgement giving your kid with any arrest record a gun (I would not, and I have given guns as gifts).

Agreed.

this is why the only major law that needs tightening is the few instances of sales of firearms where no BG check is made. I think even in private sales there should at least be a # to call, run their drivers license or ID through, get a yes no answer to do they have a criminal background, and then continue with the sale after a 5-20 min phone call (assuming no record of course)

the states really has good gun laws, IE no guns for crooks, its just that enforcement of these laws is a bit slap dash so we have loopholes like this unfortunately.

If Daddy got the background check and legally bought the gun, your point is not valid at all. The only sale made, dealer to Daddy, followed the law. What part of that indicates a need to tighten the law?

I dont think you read it properly CPT JAKE


i said *PRIVATE* sales(or transfers in the case of a gift) should also have a # to call to check for criminal records, set up a hot line thats free and anonymous for the seller, bam, one phone call and you know if the guy is a crook or not.

 easysauce wrote:
I dont think you read it properly CPT JAKE


i said *PRIVATE* sales should also have a # to call to check for criminal records

There was no private sale. Hence if a law requiring a check for private sales existed, the kid still would have had the gun Daddy gave him as a gift.

 curran12 wrote:
How about we say that both sides have groups that act stupidly and not use this tragedy as a piece of political leverage?

Oh my sweet summer child.

Now that it is basically resolved until we start getting charges brought/court happening, I'm going to lock it because all that is happening are the same pro/anti gun arguments with a hefty sprinkling of people verging on rule 1 violations, and since these threads so often end in calm agreeement and logical discussion from both sides...wait what am I saying? So yeah, when charges start we'll start a new thread, and gun laws will NOT be a part of it until a polly takes action because of the shooting/it becomes actually relevant in some way. We'll leave this sniping for as long as possible, because it is just ugly.