Texas shooting suspect got assault weapon despite domestic violence conviction

Texas shooting suspect got assault weapon despite apparent domestic violence conviction - ABC News

 

What a horrible situation my condolences to the friends and families affected by this.


So he broke a gun law? Actually he broke quite a few, perhaps a few more would have stopped him.

 

Abner, you are correct: There was already a law on the books that prohibited the deceased suspect from possessing guns. The suspect broke the law and possessed a gun anyway.

Conversely, someone who was legally in possession of a gun was able to shoot the suspect, thus causing him to flee before he could inflict more mayhem. It's ironic, isn't it?

The alt.left wants to:
- Disarm honest citizens (who have never been arrested)
- Create more anti-gun laws (which criminals will not obey)
- Prohibit honest citizens from acquiring guns
- Abolish the Second Amendment to the Constitution
- Make it so only the police and the military may lawfully possess guns

The First Amendment and the Second Amendment are the biggest threats to the alt.left (and to communism).

 

The story here is that he was able to buy a gun from a major retailer. He didn't buy the gun from another individual; he bought the gun from a retailer that does background checks. Either they didn't perform the background check like they were supposed to, or his criminal record didn't show up in NCIC. THAT is the real story. Why did the background check fail? People like this rarely have the connections to buy guns on the black market. Most of these people buy guns in stores, but they can also find someone at a gun show who is not required to do a background check. Some sellers at gun shows perform background checks voluntarily.

I don't know how you can glance over the fact that a major retailer sold him a gun. He didn't even have to put any effort into breaking the law. He walked into a mainstream store, where I have also bought guns, and they just gave it to him. Obviously, the law was not being enforced properly.

 

The article you posted has very little detail. The neighbor started shooting at the murderer after he exited the church. The murderer was done. The church was small, so it might be that most of the people there were shot. We also don't know yet if the shooter was shot by the neighbor or shot himself while being followed by two neighbors. Either way, the neighbor with the gun was too late. I commend what he did, but he didn't stop the shooting inside that church.

 

Sanantone, the suspect became preoccupied with escaping, while he was being pursued, so the suspect was unable to shoot more unarmed citizens. According to one un-evaluated news source, the armed citizen's bullet slipped between flaps in the suspect's bullet proof vest, thus penetrating the suspect's body. An autopsy will provide conclusive details, regarding which bullet entry-point(s) were the cause of his demise.

 

Did the neighbor enter the church? If not, then the gunman was already leaving. If the neighbor simply shot at the church from the outside indiscriminately, then the neighbor could have hit innocent people. So far, I can't find any report that says that the neighbor made the shooter exit the church.

 

Sanantone, if you're suggesting that the armed homicidal gunman could have potentially shot more victims, after exiting the church, then yes, you are correct. More tragedy was averted, thanks in part to a lawfully armed citizen who intervened.

 

The thing that helped most was that he was followed and dispatch was being given updates on his location. We don't know yet who was his target. His mother-in-law attended that church and wasn't there that day. He had past domestic violence incidents with his wife.

I sometimes carry a gun, but I wouldn't want to be given credit for stopping a shooting that pretty much already stopped. The media loves hero stories, so that's what we'll get.

 

I'm hearing new reports that he was wounded at the church, but the cause of death was a self-inflicted gunshot.

 

If the news reports I've read are correct (and who the hell knows these days?), then the shooter received either a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge from the Air Force, which in and of itself is an automatic disqualifier for firearms ownership.

Someone dropped the ball.

 

Trump is praised by his followers for being politically incorrect and telling it like it is. What Olberman pointed out is the truth. When there is an Islamic terrorist attack, we hear about immigrant bans and all kinds of tougher restrictions. When a non-Muslim, American citizen kills a whole bunch of people, we hear thoughts and prayers and get no action. Americans are much more likely to be shot by other Americans than killed by an Islamic terrorist.

 

You're comparing apples to orangutans.

Owning a firearm is a right that is protected and guaranteed by the United States Constitution. Immigrating to the United States is no sort of right at all, it's a privilege that's been rampantly abused for the last 8+ years.

 

Many of these terrorist attacks have been carried out by American citizens and permanent residents who have been here for decades. People also have the natural right to live, but our government isn't doing much to protect that right. Hundreds of people are being murdered in mass shootings by non-Muslim Americans? Oh, well. We send our thoughts and prayers.

 

Sanantone:
1. What would you like the government to do?
2. What new laws would you like to see passed?

 

Tougher background checks that are required for all gun sellers, tougher restrictions on who can buy guns, and a ban on bump stocks and other modifications that turn semi-automatic weapons into automatic weapons. Keep in mind that most of these mass shooters bought their guns in stores.

 

Do you know what I would also like to see? I would like to see more promotion of mental healthcare. Texas has a severe shortage of mental health professionals. The state is trying to remedy this problem by offering tuition reimbursement; but, other than a couple of news articles, the program hasn't been advertised. It should be mentioned on the websites of every licensing board.

Another thing that can be done to attract more people to the field is to pay more. You can't force private employers to pay more, but government employers can increase their wages putting pressure on the private sector to pay more. People who are required to have a 60-credit master's degree (Texas recently increased the educational requirement for counselors and marriage and family therapists) should not be offered $40k-45k salaries. And, the Texas Department of Health and Human Services wonders why it struggles so much to fill mental health positions. The state doesn't even have enough beds for mentally ill people facing charges. I worked in a jail where this teenager tried to hang himself, and we had nowhere to send him for treatment.

Our politicians should also stop trying to remove the requirement that insurance companies cover mental health and substance abuse treatment.

 

We finally have an answer. The Air Force admitted that they failed to notify civilian law enforcement of the domestic violence conviction, so it wasn't in the federal database.

Air Force failed to relay info that could have stopped firearm sale to gunman - CNNPolitics

Also, he might have received a bad conduct discharge rather than a dishonorable discharge. What's interesting is that Texas DPS saw something on his record because they denied his request for a concealed handgun license.

 

That's odd.