"Guns don't kill people...." Oh yeah? ask the 50 killed in Orlando what killed them? Oh wait. You can't. They're dead. But their bodies can speak. And it was a bullet from a gun fired by a madman that killed them.
It never fails, simpletons always focus of expediency, rather than logic. How about the FBI knowing about this guy, not once, but twice? How about this mentally deranged guy working for GS2 security, the company with multiple government contracts? So who failed us, the FBI, G2S or the State who licensed this guy as a security guard? All of them failed us. Don't be so simple minded or single dimensional. Focus on the bigger issue. We have serious mental health issues in this Country, and also lax governmental oversight in many operational phases of government. Perhaps, you should ask yourself how many would have been saved if just one club goer had been armed with the possibility of neutralizing the shooter. There is no comfort to be had in any of this debate, but perhaps we can learn from our mistakes and demand more accountability in both attending to mental health issues and identification and follow up of potentially dangerous individuals and situations. These priorities will go a long way to protecting us all.
If everyone had a gun in the club, this Islamic loser would have shot one person before getting shot, not 50. Criminals don't follow the law, and there are more guns in this country than people. Writing laws in books won't help; arming yourself and defending yourself will help
12:43........you raise some good points, but doesn't your comment about the FBI's allegedly failing us assume that the FBI had enough to do something? Let's remember that the agencies have limited resources. Investigating one case takes time away from another. Further, it's not like they can just monitor phone conversations, go up on wires, etc. whenever they feel like it. Let's not forget that the Constitution, as well as our courts which have arguably expanded constitutional protections, imposes serious restrictions on the agencies' ability to obtain and seize evidence and monitor, detain and arrest people. It's all to easy to paint things with a broad brush and hammer people in hindsight.
I had an elderly client. Alzheimer. had a concealed Weapons Permit. Wife begged state of Florida not renew. Sent them all the medical records. He, of course, thought he was fine. State of Florida approved the concealed weapons permit for the elderly man with Alzheimer. How does story end? I represented him in REG. Great Job State.
The truth of the matter is that the right wing is defending the right of any lunatic or Isis member to buy military grade assault weapons capable of killing dozens at a time. Geez they passed a law prohibiting doctors from asking about gun ownership of their patients. Why are these firearms available to people at all?
BTDT: You are correct about the "limitations" encountered by law enforcement in certain phases of an investigation, but I do believe there is room for improvement. And yes hindsight is always 20-20. The point is that heightened scrutiny to warning signs should be the norm, not the exception in this day and age. Law enforcement intelligence is just that, reliable information which does not rise to the level of prosecution, but provides a reasonable basis for further investigation. Likewise, warning signs about mental health issues require heighten priority. I understand this lunatic was on the no fly list. If so, this means there already existed credible or prima facia evidence that he posed a security risk. This raised questions as to how the State of Florida licensed him as a security guard, and how G4S, which is a primary government contractor had this guy working for them, even after serious question were raised about his conduct. While I subscribe to the principal that those who are willing to sacrifice constitutional rights for temporary security deserve neither, I also believe that having to offer credible information or explanation for documented conduct which poses a risk to the community, your spouse, your family, or even to yourself, is acceptable within reasonable bounds. How we balance the objectives, is another issue. Historically, our country has prioritized the "flavor of the day," but only after the snow cone has melted and made a mess.
3:25, an AR-15 is not a "military grade assault weapon" because, unlike military-grade assault weapons is semi-automatic only and is incapable of selective fire, that is, it lacks the capability to be switched from semi-automatic to fully automatic operation. Neither lunatics nor ISIS members nor anyone can buy military-grade assault weapons because they have been restricted sin the NFA of 1934 and FOPA of 1986 prohibits new military-grade assalult weapons from entering the already-restricted civilian market.
2:18, your Alzheimer's client seems to have been well enough mentally and cognitively to fill out the renewal form, enclose payment and mail it back to Tallahassee. The disease must have progressed by the time when he got in triuble with the law.
3:41 p.m. is correct. There are constitutional limitations that, correctly, place more value on freedom than on security. I take freedom over security any time and I avoid gun-free zones because all they do is give free and proteced rein to mass shooters and criminal to kill people. Mateen, having security and gun licenses knew very well that bars and clubs whose main business is the sale of alcohol are gun free zones. The Legislature needs to amend s. 790.06 F.S. to reduce gun free zones to the barest minimum necessary. Absent the gun-free zone, most people in the Pulse club would be alive today, either because they would have killed Mateen when he began shooting or because Mateen would not have chosen a "safer" venue to carry out his massacre.
341: We're not far apart. The reality is that we don't know what information G4S had or why they made the decisions they made. Maybe they screwed up royally, maybe they didn't. Maybe they missed obvious signs and should be slammed. Then again.............maybe they were just afraid of being accused of discrimination if they fired him. Or simply negligent. Who knows? I just think it's way too early for people to be judging anyone other than the shooter.
As a gay guy and a lawyer and a gun owner, I am sad and a bit scared right now. I have a permit but, hate carrying my gun. The law says I can't carry it into a bar anyway unless they sell food and not just food for snacks. So, what do I do?
I choose to live a normal life. I will not let assholes with guns change my daily life. I choose to go to a gay bar when I want to. I'm not Jewish but, if I want to go to a synagogue, I will.
That being said, I feel very sad for the friends and families of so many who died in Orlando.
its true that the bullets didn't fly on their own, they were directed. By a man who could buy them legally. But that's missing the point. If no one could legally buy a weapon of military grade then he would not have ha the ability and that is the point. To those who say starting now won't eliminate whats on the street I say you start somewhere and over time you do get them off the street. And you enforce strict gun laws with mandatory jail sentences. Enough is enough.
8:16, the AR15 is not a weapon of "military grade". Cosmetically, it may look like the M16's and M4's used by the military, but it is not. It is a plain modern sporting rifle. The reason there were so many wounded is the low lethality of the tiny full-metal jacket bullet that the AR-15 fires. When the autopsy reports come out, it will likely show that most of the dead were hit by the bigger hollowpoint bullets from the 9mm handgun or were hit multiple times with the rifle bullets.
This really doesnt have to be either/or, unless you GAIN by exacerbating division, which Hillary and Trump do.
It's quite easy to see that the problem includes *both* a proliferation of deadly weapons *and* a broken immigration system coupled with hundreds of millions would be immigrants/refugees from the Islamic world who endorse religious violence against civilians.
Neither is easy.
The first, because possessing deadly weapons was deemed to be a "right" to the architects of our constitutional system, so sacred that it needed explicit protection, stemming from their deep distrust of governmental overreach and the final protection of citizens being able to kill to preserve liberty.
The second, because unlike most other nation-states, we are not *primarily* ethnic in identity and we aspire to a Lockean marketplace society, where the best of all cultures can rise to the top and improve all our lives. We don't want to summarily exclude any culture or religion.
So no, shit ain't easy. We can't merely ban deadly guns. And we can't simply get rid of Muslims. Both solutions are repulsive to our core values and worldview.
But distrust anyone who does not at least name both as contributing factors.
"Guns don't kill people...."
ReplyDeleteOh yeah? ask the 50 killed in Orlando what killed them? Oh wait. You can't. They're dead. But their bodies can speak. And it was a bullet from a gun fired by a madman that killed them.
Amen.
DeleteOrlando Tragedy?
ReplyDeleteTry "Orlando Mass Murder by Gunman"
It never fails, simpletons always focus of expediency, rather than logic. How about the FBI knowing about this guy, not once, but twice? How about this mentally deranged guy working for GS2 security, the company with multiple government contracts? So who failed us, the FBI, G2S or the State who licensed this guy as a security guard? All of them failed us. Don't be so simple minded or single dimensional. Focus on the bigger issue. We have serious mental health issues in this Country, and also lax governmental oversight in many operational phases of government. Perhaps, you should ask yourself how many would have been saved if just one club goer had been armed with the possibility of neutralizing the shooter. There is no comfort to be had in any of this debate, but perhaps we can learn from our mistakes and demand more accountability in both attending to mental health issues and identification and follow up of potentially dangerous individuals and situations. These priorities will go a long way to protecting us all.
ReplyDeleteIf everyone had a gun in the club, this Islamic loser would have shot one person before getting shot, not 50. Criminals don't follow the law, and there are more guns in this country than people. Writing laws in books won't help; arming yourself and defending yourself will help
ReplyDeleteThat madman was the security guard that ran the magnetometer at the Port St. Lucie courthouse
ReplyDeleteNo stupid at 10. Islamist fanatics killed the people in Orlando. You're all so predictable.
ReplyDeleteThe madman killed them. The bullets didn't fly by themselves anymore than a car drives itself to kill someone.
ReplyDelete12:43........you raise some good points, but doesn't your comment about the FBI's allegedly failing us assume that the FBI had enough to do something? Let's remember that the agencies have limited resources. Investigating one case takes time away from another. Further, it's not like they can just monitor phone conversations, go up on wires, etc. whenever they feel like it. Let's not forget that the Constitution, as well as our courts which have arguably expanded constitutional protections, imposes serious restrictions on the agencies' ability to obtain and seize evidence and monitor, detain and arrest people. It's all to easy to paint things with a broad brush and hammer people in hindsight.
ReplyDeleteBTDT
I had an elderly client. Alzheimer. had a concealed Weapons Permit. Wife begged state of Florida not renew. Sent them all the medical records. He, of course, thought he was fine. State of Florida approved the concealed weapons permit for the elderly man with Alzheimer. How does story end? I represented him in REG. Great Job State.
ReplyDeleteThe truth of the matter is that the right wing is defending the right of any lunatic or Isis member to buy military grade assault weapons capable of killing dozens at a time. Geez they passed a law prohibiting doctors from asking about gun ownership of their patients. Why are these firearms available to people at all?
ReplyDeleteBTDT: You are correct about the "limitations" encountered by law enforcement in certain phases of an investigation, but I do believe there is room for improvement. And yes hindsight is always 20-20. The point is that heightened scrutiny to warning signs should be the norm, not the exception in this day and age. Law enforcement intelligence is just that, reliable information which does not rise to the level of prosecution, but provides a reasonable basis for further investigation. Likewise, warning signs about mental health issues require heighten priority. I understand this lunatic was on the no fly list. If so, this means there already existed credible or prima facia evidence that he posed a security risk. This raised questions as to how the State of Florida licensed him as a security guard, and how G4S, which is a primary government contractor had this guy working for them, even after serious question were raised about his conduct. While I subscribe to the principal that those who are willing to sacrifice constitutional rights for temporary security deserve neither, I also believe that having to offer credible information or explanation for documented conduct which poses a risk to the community, your spouse, your family, or even to yourself, is acceptable within reasonable bounds. How we balance the objectives, is another issue. Historically, our country has prioritized the "flavor of the day," but only after the snow cone has melted and made a mess.
ReplyDelete3:25, an AR-15 is not a "military grade assault weapon" because, unlike military-grade assault weapons is semi-automatic only and is incapable of selective fire, that is, it lacks the capability to be switched from semi-automatic to fully automatic operation. Neither lunatics nor ISIS members nor anyone can buy military-grade assault weapons because they have been restricted sin the NFA of 1934 and FOPA of 1986 prohibits new military-grade assalult weapons from entering the already-restricted civilian market.
ReplyDelete2:18, your Alzheimer's client seems to have been well enough mentally and cognitively to fill out the renewal form, enclose payment and mail it back to Tallahassee. The disease must have progressed by the time when he got in triuble with the law.
ReplyDelete3:41 p.m. is correct. There are constitutional limitations that, correctly, place more value on freedom than on security. I take freedom over security any time and I avoid gun-free zones because all they do is give free and proteced rein to mass shooters and criminal to kill people. Mateen, having security and gun licenses knew very well that bars and clubs whose main business is the sale of alcohol are gun free zones. The Legislature needs to amend s. 790.06 F.S. to reduce gun free zones to the barest minimum necessary. Absent the gun-free zone, most people in the Pulse club would be alive today, either because they would have killed Mateen when he began shooting or because Mateen would not have chosen a "safer" venue to carry out his massacre.
ReplyDelete341: We're not far apart. The reality is that we don't know what information G4S had or why they made the decisions they made. Maybe they screwed up royally, maybe they didn't. Maybe they missed obvious signs and should be slammed. Then again.............maybe they were just afraid of being accused of discrimination if they fired him. Or simply negligent. Who knows? I just think it's way too early for people to be judging anyone other than the shooter.
ReplyDeleteBTDT
As a gay guy and a lawyer and a gun owner, I am sad and a bit scared right now. I have a permit but, hate carrying my gun. The law says I can't carry it into a bar anyway unless they sell food and not just food for snacks. So, what do I do?
ReplyDeleteI choose to live a normal life. I will not let assholes with guns change my daily life. I choose to go to a gay bar when I want to. I'm not Jewish but, if I want to go to a synagogue, I will.
That being said, I feel very sad for the friends and families of so many who died in Orlando.
Hug the people you love tonight. It's worth it.
its true that the bullets didn't fly on their own, they were directed. By a man who could buy them legally. But that's missing the point. If no one could legally buy a weapon of military grade then he would not have ha the ability and that is the point. To those who say starting now won't eliminate whats on the street I say you start somewhere and over time you do get them off the street. And you enforce strict gun laws with mandatory jail sentences. Enough is enough.
ReplyDelete8:16, the AR15 is not a weapon of "military grade". Cosmetically, it may look like the M16's and M4's used by the military, but it is not. It is a plain modern sporting rifle. The reason there were so many wounded is the low lethality of the tiny full-metal jacket bullet that the AR-15 fires. When the autopsy reports come out, it will likely show that most of the dead were hit by the bigger hollowpoint bullets from the 9mm handgun or were hit multiple times with the rifle bullets.
ReplyDeleteThis really doesnt have to be either/or, unless you GAIN by exacerbating division, which Hillary and Trump do.
ReplyDeleteIt's quite easy to see that the problem includes *both* a proliferation of deadly weapons *and* a broken immigration system coupled with hundreds of millions would be immigrants/refugees from the Islamic world who endorse religious violence against civilians.
Neither is easy.
The first, because possessing deadly weapons was deemed to be a "right" to the architects of our constitutional system, so sacred that it needed explicit protection, stemming from their deep distrust of governmental overreach and the final protection of citizens being able to kill to preserve liberty.
The second, because unlike most other nation-states, we are not *primarily* ethnic in identity and we aspire to a Lockean marketplace society, where the best of all cultures can rise to the top and improve all our lives. We don't want to summarily exclude any culture or religion.
So no, shit ain't easy. We can't merely ban deadly guns. And we can't simply get rid of Muslims. Both solutions are repulsive to our core values and worldview.
But distrust anyone who does not at least name both as contributing factors.