Today's Mass Shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.
Skeptic Ginger said:
Hannity is on it: Maxine Waters is to blame.
Click to expand...


And now denying that he ever said it.

Amid criticisms over his comment, Hannity's website fired back and accused the media of creating what he called "a false narrative that fits their agenda."
"Sean Hannity never tied today's horrific shooting to the comments made by Representative Maxine Waters. Today's event was pure evil, and no one can control someone who is intent on inflicting pain and violence," his website stated. "It's unfortunate that some outlets have to stoop to lying to attempt to get ratings and clicks."
Click to expand...


It's too bad that people have this newfangled recording technology.
 
Denying what you said, even though it was recorded, is becoming fairly common these days. It seems like there are few consequences for being caught lying.

Then again, if Maxine can deny what she said, then I guess Hannity can deny what he said.
 
Last edited:
PhantomWolf said:
Because his crime wasn't a felony and because he wasn't her husband, so his harassment doesn't fall under the domestic abuse clause either.

And yet here again we see a guy that is openly hostile and threatening towards women, who then goes and gets a gun and starts shooting people. Can't say the warnings weren't there, it's just that everyone refuses to look at them and take action to prevent the disaster before it happens, because it's more politically correct to mop up the innocent blood of the hundreds slain afterwards, than to upset the "rights" of a misogynist by taking away his guns first, even if he might not have been planning to go crazy with them.
Click to expand...

She reportedly told the police that he'd be "your next mass shooter".
 
PhantomWolf said:
Because his crime wasn't a felony and because he wasn't her husband, so his harassment doesn't fall under the domestic abuse clause either.

And yet here again we see a guy that is openly hostile and threatening towards women, who then goes and gets a gun and starts shooting people. Can't say the warnings weren't there, it's just that everyone refuses to look at them and take action to prevent the disaster before it happens, because it's more politically correct to mop up the innocent blood of the hundreds slain afterwards, than to upset the "rights" of a misogynist by taking away his guns first, even if he might not have been planning to go crazy with them.
Click to expand...


In very much the same way that some justice systems work on 'it is better to let a guilty man go free than to lock up an innocent man', US gun control seems to work on it being morally superior to risk one dangerous lunatic with a gun than to risk denying second amendment rights to any non-dangerous lunatics,
 
Well 'red flags' are not part of gun licensing policy anywhere, AFAIK. No prior felony is pretty much universal. Some countries may require medical examination, training course, safe handling exam, or even psycho tests. Medical examination usually only catches real hard cases. Not sure how psycho tests could be useful.
But for sure no procedure includes twitter review.
Also in US, all the background checks etc. are about purchase of the gun, not owning the gun, IIRC.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Denying what you said, even though it was recorded, is becoming fairly common these days. It seems like there are few consequences for being caught lying.

Then again, if Maxine can deny what she said, then I guess Hannity can deny what he said.
Click to expand...

When did Maxine Waters deny what she said?
 
Dr.Sid said:
Well 'red flags' are not part of gun licensing policy anywhere, AFAIK. No prior felony is pretty much universal. Some countries may require medical examination, training course, safe handling exam, or even psycho tests. Medical examination usually only catches real hard cases. Not sure how psycho tests could be useful.
But for sure no procedure includes twitter review.
Also in US, all the background checks etc. are about purchase of the gun, not owning the gun, IIRC.
Click to expand...

In some states, "red flags" (a.k.a. Extreme Risk Protection Orders) can block purchase of guns.

Red Flag Laws: Helping Prevent Mass Shootings
If a court finds that a person poses a significant danger of injuring themselves or others with a firearm, that person is temporarily prohibited from purchasing and possessing guns and required to turn over their guns while the order is in effect.
Click to expand...

Of course these are state laws, not federal, so the scope will vary from state to state. Not all states with such laws on the books have it set up so the flag will show up on the background check. In states that don't have universal background checks, it is still easy to avoid the background check altogether by going through private/non-dealer sales.


Extreme Risk Protection Orders

This is from model legislation crafted by the Giffords center, I am not sure how many states are currently matching that:

Reporting for Background Checks: Upon issuing an ERPO, the court must ensure that records identifying the person subject to the ERPO who is restrained from having a gun are promptly submitted to the background check system. This requirement will help ensure that the person cannot purchase any new guns.
Click to expand...
 
Dr.Sid said:
Well 'red flags' are not part of gun licensing policy anywhere, AFAIK. No prior felony is pretty much universal. Some countries may require medical examination, training course, safe handling exam, or even psycho tests. Medical examination usually only catches real hard cases. Not sure how psycho tests could be useful.
But for sure no procedure includes twitter review.
Also in US, all the background checks etc. are about purchase of the gun, not owning the gun, IIRC.
Click to expand...



Here in Canada, I know of one case personally where the police temporarily confiscated guns when they perceived there to be a potential threat. My friend and his brother were both licensed to have firearms, and did own several. The brother did something stupid that made one of his university professors think that he was a threat, so it was reported to the police. The police took possession of all the guns in the house, until my friend could prove that his brother no longer lived there, and thus had no regular access to the weapons.
 
Horatius said:
Here in Canada, I know of one case personally where the police temporarily confiscated guns when they perceived there to be a potential threat. My friend and his brother were both licensed to have firearms, and did own several. The brother did something stupid that made one of his university professors think that he was a threat, so it was reported to the police. The police took possession of all the guns in the house, until my friend could prove that his brother no longer lived there, and thus had no regular access to the weapons.
Click to expand...

Assuming that the stupid thing in question was relatively harmless, is there a process for the brother to prove that this was a mistake and get his guns back?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Both Trump and Milo are off the hook apparently.

The guy was a stalker, the paper reported on him.
Click to expand...

But isn't encouraging people who have problems to attack their "enemies" exactly how terrorist propaganda and radicalization works? Its not like the guy who's been sitting around thinking "Hey, America is pretty awesome I really wish we were on better terms with them!" is going to hear a terrorist leader and suddenly decide to build some IEDs to take out American soldiers. The propaganda targets people that already hate the "enemies" they call out against.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Denying what you said, even though it was recorded, is becoming fairly common these days. It seems like there are few consequences for being caught lying.

Then again, if Maxine can deny what she said, then I guess Hannity can deny what he said.
Click to expand...

What did she deny? She did clarify she was urging civil disobedience, not violence.
 
LTC8K6 said:
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/06/25/maxine-waters-protest-civility/
Click to expand...

To call that 'denying one said something' is quite a stretch.

Maxine Waters On Kicking Sarah Sanders Out Of A Restaurant: ‘I Had Nothing To Do With That’
Click to expand...
Of course she didn't.

Waters gave a press conference in which she claimed she was only defending the right to protest and denied that she wanted anyone to be harmed. ...

“The restauranteur who decided not to serve or have the person in…is responsible for that,” Waters said. She continued, “I had nothing to do with that.”

Um, what?
Click to expand...
Um, that. She's right.
 
Dr.Sid said:
Well 'red flags' are not part of gun licensing policy anywhere, AFAIK. No prior felony is pretty much universal. Some countries may require medical examination, training course, safe handling exam, or even psycho tests. Medical examination usually only catches real hard cases. Not sure how psycho tests could be useful.
But for sure no procedure includes twitter review.
Also in US, all the background checks etc. are about purchase of the gun, not owning the gun, IIRC.
Click to expand...

In the UK all gun owners details are put onto the PNC (Police National Computer) so that if they get charged with a crime, it flags up they have a gun and there has to be consideration if they can keep it or not. A minor road traffic charge and they will keep the gun. An assault and it will be seized pending the outcome. If found guilty it is likely they will lose the licence and have their gun seized.

Background checks are done every five years when the licence comes up for renewal.

Referees are expected to comment on the gun owners suitability and to flag up any mental health issues they become aware of.
 
Cat Not Included said:
But isn't encouraging people who have problems to attack their "enemies" exactly how terrorist propaganda and radicalization works? Its not like the guy who's been sitting around thinking "Hey, America is pretty awesome I really wish we were on better terms with them!" is going to hear a terrorist leader and suddenly decide to build some IEDs to take out American soldiers. The propaganda targets people that already hate the "enemies" they call out against.
Click to expand...
Yes if more evidence comes out it may very well turn out all the news bashing contributed.
 
The suspect charged in a deadly shooting at a Maryland newspaper office on Thursday used a pump-action shotgun that was legally purchased, according to the local Arundel County police.

"We've confirmed I think already that it was a shotgun used in the incident," Police Chief Timothy Altomare said at a press conference on Friday.

"I will also confirm that it was a pump action shotgun, it was legally purchased a year or so ago."

Altomare said the attack on the Capital Gazette in Annapolis, Md., was a "targeted" attack.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom