Shooter at DC Shipyard

Dcdrac said:
No hysteics NWO jsut pointing out from outside the USA it looks like its lost is grip on controlling guns, the only hsyteria I have seen is from the anti gun control lobby only serving to make the problem of almost total lack of any control whatsoever worse.
Click to expand...

No, despite the moral panic, violent crime across the developed world is actually lowest since the 1970s. Largely due to lead being removed from the environment.

And these sort of crimes are extremely rare.
 
newyorkguy said:
It looks like they charged him with discharge of a weapon. I don't see a disposition in the report you were kind enough to link. However, he acted very irresponsibly but I think to call it shooting up a car in a rage is maybe overstating it a bit. He fired three shots at a tire of an unoccupied vehicle because...wasn't this over construction workers hogging parking spaces? Not to minimize it but...

:cool:
Click to expand...

You don't shoot at someone's car unless you are angry, imo. And have control problems.

It also says he displayed the pistol often.

Clear signs of danger, imo.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like somebody dropped the ball badly on this one.
A paranoid schizophrenic, going by the descriptions, who had severe anger issues and discharged a firearm in dubious circumstances on more than one occasion and nothing was done about it?

Latest news seems to indicate that there was some foot-dragging over attempts to get his mental illness treated, which may have lead to him keeping his clearance.
If that's true, then someone's going to be held responsible for this, other than the shooter.
 
Nutpisit Suthamtewakul, owner of Happy Bowl Thai in White Settlement, Texas, said was a "good and close friend" of Alexis. He said the two lived together for three or four years.

"I don't believe he did that," Suthamtewakul told ABC News. "He can be tough physically, but I don't think he'd kill people."

Suthamtewakul said Alexis liked to play games, drink and party. Alexis spoke Thai fluently, he said, traveled a lot for work and had been living in Washington for four or five months.

"He's not aggressive," he said. "He had a gun but that doesn't mean he's gonna shoot people. He had a concealed-weapons permit."
Click to expand...

Source
 
NWO Sentryman said:
No, despite the moral panic, violent crime across the developed world is actually lowest since the 1970s. Largely due to lead being removed from the environment.

And these sort of crimes are extremely rare.
Click to expand...

But they are extraordinarily rare in the rest of the Western World, such that in the USA they seem common place.

Easy access to guns plus a society that can be ruthless with those in need of help and support for medical/mental health issues and the way it hires and fires people with a poor welfare safety net, that sets the USA apart.
 
newyorkguy said:
It looks like they charged him with discharge of a weapon. I don't see a disposition in the report you were kind enough to link. However, he acted very irresponsibly but I think to call it shooting up a car in a rage is maybe overstating it a bit. He fired three shots at a tire of an unoccupied vehicle because...wasn't this over construction workers hogging parking spaces? Not to minimize it but...

:cool:
Click to expand...

I dunno. I think that is a red flag right there. Discharging your firearm in a residential area (other than in defense of life & limb) should be taken seriously.
 
Giz said:
I dunno. I think that is a red flag right there. Discharging your firearm in a residential area (other than in defense of life & limb) should be taken seriously.
Click to expand...

It was taken seriously. He was arrested. Maybe it wasn't taken seriously enough? Should an incident like that mean someone can never again legally possess a firearm? Would the NRA support that?

Umm, firearms for felons?

The NRA has actually worked to put guns back into criminals' hands. Following is the saga of the federal "relief from disability" program. The NRA has worked to expand and protect this guns-for-felons program that has rearmed thousands of convicted—and often violent—felons.
Click to expand...
Link

The NRA's tactics here have been problematic and should give reasonable people serious doubts about the National Rifle Association. The NRA has worked very hard to allow persons convicted of felonies to regain their right 'to bear arms.'
 
Last edited:
newyorkguy said:
It was taken seriously. He was arrested. Maybe it wasn't taken seriously enough? Should an incident like that mean someone can never again legally posses a firearm? Would the NRA support that?

Umm, firearms for felons?

Link

The NRA's tactics here have been problematic and should give reasonable people serious doubts about the National Rifle Association. The NRA has worked very hard to allow persons convicted of felonies to regain their right 'to bear arms.'
Click to expand...

But he wasn't charged, was he? So not taken that seriously...

Also, there is not necessarily a contradiction between wanting:
1) Anti-social behavior involving firearms to be looked at strictly
2) Allowing ex-felons, who have paid their debt to society and then demonstrated that they have stayed on the straight and narrow and kept 'good moral character' for some years post-release being able to expunge their felony and regain some of the rights they forfeited.
 
Giz said:
But he wasn't charged, was he? So not taken that seriously...
Click to expand...

He was arrested, do you mean he wasn't convicted? I don't know what the outcome was.

Giz said:
Also, there is not necessarily a contradiction between wanting:
1) Anti-social behavior involving firearms to be looked at strictly
2) Allowing ex-felons, who have paid their debt to society and then demonstrated that they have stayed on the straight and narrow and kept 'good moral character' for some years post-release being able to expunge their felony and regain some of the rights they forfeited.
Click to expand...

You didn't read the link, right?

I don't know that I agree. If someone is convicted of a serious felony should they be at some point allowed to regain their right to legally possess a firearm? I don't know that they should. People who committed burglary or sold drugs? I'm not as familiar with the arguments FOR it as I am with the arguments AGAINST it. And we're going way off-topic here so I'm going to stop now.
 
Post deleted.

If we can't tie the story to the issue of gun control, perhaps we could comment on the shooter's motive.

Did he have a problem with the service in the food court???
 
Last edited:
The shooter had mental health issues...thanks BBC, crack journalism there!
 
What I want to know is how the hell with all the problems in his past he got a freaking security cleareance. Seems to me that Less Then Honorable Discharge would be a huge flag you do not want to trust this guy with high security stuff.
 
I'm with you on that dubalb. I was listening to a radio program today that had the former commander of the USS Cole on, and he asked the same thing. His opinion was too much caseload, not enough in depth investigation into their background. But, you'd think that a military TSC would include, you know, looking at his military record. I can almost guarantee that someone will be fired, and that things will change. Unfortunately for 12 families, it's too late. Sad all the way around.
 
dudalb said:
What I want to know is how the hell with all the problems in his past he got a freaking security cleareance. Seems to me that Less Then Honorable Discharge would be a huge flag you do not want to trust this guy with high security stuff.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you'd think background checks for security clearances would involve looking into whether or not the applicant is known to the police, especially considering that he has run into them on various occations.
 
triforcharity said:
Private firearms are not allowed on federal property, except for a few exceptions. Thanks for proving you're ignorant on gun laws.
Click to expand...
I'M ignorant? You're the one pretending I was referring to privately owned guns.` Even the guy from the NRA didn't refer ONLY to privately owned guns. It's a naval base. There are guns on it. And yet, this shooting still happened.

Thanks for proving you're ignorant on everything.

Strawman.
Click to expand...
Including what 'strawman' means.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom