Waffle House shooting leaves 4 dead, several injured; gunman sought

All this highlights is we need clear, supported, well funded federal policy to ensure that people like this guy can't legally possess guns in any state after the incidents that occurred. We should not solely be relying on the family of the mentally ill to keep deadly weapons out of their hands. Anyone who has a mentally ill member of their family knows the difficulties that already come with the illness much less being accountable for ensuring they don't acquire or keep guns. In this case, the father probably presumed he was in a "good place" at that moment and gave the guns back. Father's aren't known for objectivity when it comes to their children whom they love. And now this father shares some responsibility for what happened at the Waffle House.

 

it's the rights war on drugs, Nixon started that one



though not sure what that has to do with Waffle Guy, the White house caught him and let him go back into the public to kill people

 

The liberal media doesn't want to offend conservatives? Yeah right.

 

Then you agree its US legislation that causes the high mortailty in accidents and murders.

But nonsense arguments

I would look at the how they do the killing just as much.

You have to approach such an issue from diffrent sides.

And no before you start blabbing about banning guns, not for that, restricting certain and strickter controls would go a long way.

 

Your meme was total BS again :

Switzerland doesnt require people to own guns and its doesnt have the lowest homocide rate in the entire world.
Honduras doesnt have the highest ( El Salvador does) and its perfectly legal to buy and own a gun in honduras

Reality is that the lowest country (of any size ) is singapore followed by japan. Both have very strict gun laws and have a homocide rate several times less then switzerland and about 20 times less then the US.


Its so stupid to post such BS in a topic like this. But then again what else to do as its clear the US has a huge problem in dealing with this issue and the only argument you have is making it worse.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Honduras

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-38365729

https://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/singapore.php

 

Yea you knew he would be taken alive which is a good thing.

 

I know of no legislation that causes accidents that's typically caused by carelessness and lack of knowledge. I don't know of any legislation that causes high mortality that's normally caused by disease accidents and so forth. It's murder is caused by murderers not legislation.

Thanks for the laugh though

those were actually questions I'm trying to see if what you're saying is as stupid as it sounds.

So I'll ask again and see if you post nonsensical sentence fragments again.

Do you think the only reason the people commit murder is because they can get guns?

because I think you're obsessed with this gun control crap people have been committing murder for tens of thousands of years. The means are of little importance the motive is what is important.

why?

well nobody seems to be able to describe these so-called stricter controls. And further than that nobody can describe how they would do anything.

And another thing no one is describing how it would protect the rights of the citizens if we enforce these arbitrary non-existent stricter controls that everyone's crowing about.

Soap for sent some stricter controls and we can discuss those. And how they would be implemented and how you can avoid discriminating against people by enforcing them. Or just keep saying stricter controls Common Sense gun reform and all these other stupid Buzz words that mean nothing.

 

What incident...trespassing ???

Reinking was arrested by the Secret Service for a misdemeanor. In the hermit state of California trespassing is treated as an infraction comparable to a over due library book. Washing your car in the drive way of your own home or taking a five minute shower is a more serious crime in California than trespassing or raping an unconscious girl.

The arrest for trespassing by the Secret Service led to an investigation by the FBI that led to the determination that Reinking may be a millennial snowflake or liberal loon and shouldn't be in possession of firearms.

 

A common NRA sheeple argument is that it won't stop people from murdering. Why does any solution have to be 100% effective? When have most solutions to complex social issues ever been 100% effective? If it saves even a handful of lives or prevents 1 person from shooting up a school a year it's worth it.

 

I thought they gave the guns back to the father, they should of kept them and charged him with a crime or got him mental health when caught at the whitehouse imo

 

agree, I want to protect the 2nd for normal guns and hand guns, but I have no issue with stricter laws for ar-15's and machine guns

 

sounds like he did not run, did not resist, gave up immediately, and the cops did not do anything to escalate it like with the innocent white hotel suspect they blew away for not being able to follow the officers crazy orders

when neither sides tries to escalate the situation, they often live - though sure he will wish he were dead when he sobers up - he will never be a free man ever again

 

AR15s are :"bearable arms" and protected by the constitution with the same veracity as "normal guns".
Never mind that handguns are used to commit FAR more murders than AR15s.

 

I would put them in the same classification as machine guns

yes, then you don't need a ar-15, a regular gun will do

 

And yet when people use this same argument to support 'the wall' and immigration reform.....

 

And essentially every president has endorsed the policy with a minor exception in the cole memo which as we've seen is barely worth the paper its printed on.


You're right, the White House should've just popped him in the internment camps they've set up.... o wait that was FDR

 

AR15s, et al, are in common use for traditionally legal purposes.
That puts them into the category of "bearable arms", same as handguns and "regularguns'.

Your perception of need is irrelevant and does not create a sound argument for the restriction of my rights.

 

Let's leave it up to the victim's families. If someone in my family is murdered, I choose the punishment. If someone in your family is murdered, you select the punishment.

 

So why won't the media call it white supremacist terrorism?

If the guy's name was Abdul, do you think the media would be shy about calling it terrorism?

 

There is a solid chance that he is legally insane, and therefore innocent. We don't punish the innocent in this country.

 

If there is no "need" for a certain firearm, then your rights can't be violated for restricting access to that type of gun.

 

Unsupportable nonsense.
There's no "need " to kneel during the national anthem, and yet your rights are violated if the state restricts your ability to do so.
The constitution protects -all- bearable arms with the same veracity; banning a bearable arm, on its face, violates the constitution under any level of scrutiny.

 

Same guy that brought a gun to "meet" Trump and thought Taylor Swift was stalking him? Question is why did the FBI return his guns to his family.. Another FBI **** up.

 

He was unarmed when he was arrested at the White House. The FBI temporarily confiscated his guns and could not do any more because of his 2nd amendment rights

 

The Supreme Court disagrees. Clearly certain firearms can be restricted without violating the right of the People to keep and bear arms.