Active shooter at CA food festival.

I agree, all the Clint Eastwood's.

 

Everything to do with it, you're a tool using ape using tools you create is a natural right. You might as well say I don't have a right to pick up an object and wipe my ass with it.

 

That's not any of the witnesses described, so no. Also: You understand that people often attend public events where alcohol is served and don't partake. Or are you projecting because you have a problem with the liquor? Shall we call you Mr. Lahey?

Additionally wielding a firearm while intoxicated is barred.
Specious argument is specious

 

Has a receipt of sale been found, to indicate the firearm was purchased from a federally licensed firearms dealer?

If no such receipt has been found, then the firearm was likely acquired in a private transaction, in a state that already requires background checks on all private firearm transactions, but is devoid of a method of enforcement.

 

There are folks here with undecided opinions or open minds. As far as gun rights go, you've convinced me you're not one of them.

 

Then why can no individual legally purchase and own a modern handgun, if there is no prohibition in place?

 

The dealer has admitted to selling to him with proper id and paperwork and nics return. So yes.

 

Does the fact that you think someone carrying, the odds are low, it would have to be the perfect scenario for that to happen.

 

According to the FBI its a 94% success rate so........... great odds.

Additionally: We have eye witness accounts of people hiding from the shooter able to see him clearly as he murdered. Guns in their hands stop this far earlier ,saving more people.
Why do you want the children to die?

 

Then the firearm in question was purchased with falsified identification documents that would indicate the individual in question was a legal resident of the state of Nevada, when in truth he was a resident of the state of California. Therefore the firearm was acquired in an illegal manner, and at least one felony offense was committed in the process.

 

Its possible his NV id was fraudulently obtained, he apparently rented a place and never actually moved in. Its also possible he just kept to himself while there and it was not fraudulently obtained. Either way he committed a crime bringing it and the mags into the state from NV

 

Oh yeah, send me the link.

 

Irrelevant as you have never been allowed to carry a gun in public ie "No civilians walked around the streets of the UK armed"

 

Kennesaw GA is a fine example of what your talking about.

 

Your position against people carrying firearms for self-defense appears conceptual, with no rational basis behind it.
Apparently, you want criminals to be safe.

 

So you're saying now that people never drink when carrying?
Oh and that bar is really going to deter a drunk person from wielding his firearm when he feels threatened or wants to be the hero.

https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news...ting-Pistol-in-Backyard-Police-512832681.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48190408
https://abc13.com/intoxicated-man-allegedly-shoots-person-helping-woman-escape/5248608/

There are so many more cases of intoxicated gun carriers.......

 

From what I read, the NV DL he used was valid, but obtained under possibly false pretenses.

It should not shock anyone that someone planning to shoot up a bunch of innocent people is willing to break the law in his efforts to set up the shoot. The anti-gun left has yet to figure this out.

 

The anti-gun crowd will look at 2016-2017 and point out the failure of the law.

 

It is when we compare it to the war on drugs.

Guns are not more difficult to make or smuggle than most drugs. Why do you think we could control them any better?

Or would you consider the war on drugs a success?

 

One cannot carry something that they cannot legally own.

Try again, and this time try to actually address the question that is actually being presented to yourself. Why can no individual legally purchase and own a modern handgun, if there is no prohibition in place?

 

Try and keep up. Ddyad wrote "The police in the UK did not need to carry submachine guns until they disarmed their law abiding population."

I'll make it simpler for you. When did they "disarm their law abiding population."? You know, when was it legal for the "law abiding population" to carry guns in public?

Instead of jumping in perhaps you should follow the conversation from the start?

Are you part of the tag team?

 

FYI, you obviously have not read my posts. I clearly stated I have no issue with carrying, as long as the person is checked out.

 

These are two different questions, not necessarily related to one another, as it is possible to disarm a population that was never able to carry guns in public, because a population can still be armed, yet unable to carry guns in public.

Why can no individual legally purchase and own a modern handgun in the UK?

 

Yet you go out of your way to argue the futility of doing so.

 

I try to keep up with the news, but maybe I missed some stories. Do we know anything about the shooter.......was he under psychological care?........using any type of drugs?.........did he have friends?........was-he a complete loner in high school?..........play sports?.........have a significant other?......... gay or straight?........previous arrests/run ins with the law? The MSM seems only to be obsessed over some obscure 19th century book he mentioned one time on Instagram.......