So he had the gun legally and was carrying it legally?
What a generous qualification you made.
Those Damn Guns Again
- Thread starter thoughtone
- Start date
Oregon high school shooter's father apologizes in letter
In the statement, Padgett also said he couldn't believe what his son was accused of doing — using
phrases like "horrified and distraught" and "deeply confused and shocked." (Via KOIN)
Padgett also says his family has never condoned violence. A family friend of nearly 30 years told
KGW-TV he and so many others saw no warning signs from Jared before the shooting.
Police say the suspected shooter got the guns used in Tuesday's shooting from his family's house.
Those guns were locked up, but <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">Oregon Sen. Ginny Burdick told KATU Padgett should be
held criminally responsible for the shooting since she claims he didn't properly lock up his
guns.</span>
"To have those in your house entails a lot of responsibility for keeping them from falling
into the wrong hands. And in that case, the guns ended up at school."
KATU reports the senator wants state lawmakers to <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">pass legislation that would hold gun
owners criminally responsible if a child gets access to their firearms</span>. As for this week's
shooting, a public funeral service for Hoffman is scheduled for next Sunday.
http://www.ajc.com/news/news/national/oregon-high-school-shooters-father-apologizes-lett/ngLkf/
Last edited:
Supreme Court Rules Against Gun 'Straw Purchases'
The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a major victory to gun control advocates on Monday.
The 5-4 ruling allows strict enforcement of the federal ban on gun "straw purchases,"
or one person buying a gun for another.
The federal law on background checks requires federally licensed gun dealers to verify
the identity of buyers and submit their names to a federal database to weed out
felons, those with a history of mental illness and others barred from gun ownership.
http://www.npr.org/2014/06/16/322650543/supreme-court-rules-against-straw-gun-purchases
_______________________________________
" . . . one small step for mankind . . . "
The Point is well taken. It belongs here and every other place you can find to post it, IMO.
source: The Daily Beast
‘Guns in Bars’ Bill Kicks Off in Georgia
Fear and confusion reigned in Georgia as the state’s controversial gun law came into effect and bar owners admitted they didn’t know what to do.
Doing shots” in Georgia bars may have a whole new meaning when HB60 goes into effect Tuesday. The Safe Carry Protection Act, also known as the “guns everywhere bill,” broadly expands the places where Georgians can carry firearms to include municipal buildings, public libraries, schools, churches, unsecured areas of airports, and bars.
While churches and schools have to opt in to the law for the expanded carry provisions to apply to them, bar owners must opt out of the legislation by posting a “no-guns” sign or removing heat-packing patrons themselves.
“The onus is now on the bar owner,” said Alisa Cleek, a partner with Elarbee Thompson law firm in Atlanta who co-chairs the firm’s restaurant advisory group. “If you don’t want weapons on your premises you have to take steps to make sure customers know that. You don’t get to sit back this time.”
Cleek said she’s seen significant confusion about how the law will apply to bars, but Georgia Attorney General Sam Olen’s office has declined to give specific guidance on bar owners’ rights and responsibilities under the new law because of potential litigation in the future.
“The answer is there is no answer,” said one highly placed state employee about the specifics of the bill.
With hours left until it went into effect, most bar owners, managers and bartenders across the state contacted by The Daily Beast were unaware that the law would go into effect Tuesday. Some knew the bill had been introduced, but did not know it had passed the legislature. Others knew it was going into effect soon, but did not know what they needed to do to keep guns out of their businesses if that’s what they wanted to do.
“That’s a good question,” became the most frequent response Monday when asked what a bar’s gun policy would be on Tuesday.
Among the handful of bars that knew the bill had passed and would go live Tuesday, all brought up the obvious problems of having guns in the same place where people would be drinking, in some cases heavily, late into the night.
“It just seems like something that could lead to trouble,” said Jonathan List at Moe’s and Joe’s, a local Atlanta fixture that sells Pabst Blue Ribbon by the $6.50 pitcher. List said the bar’s owners will likely post a “no guns” sign for customers once the law goes into effect.
"I'm a gun owner myself, but I don’t take my gun when I go drinking because I think it’s a bad idea.”
Down the street at Limerick Junction, an Irish bar with a clientele of “locals, young professionals and young not-so-professionals,” manager Josh Jacoe said the bar had not finalized its gun policy, but added, “Most of our gun-owning patrons are smart enough to know if they’re going out drinking to leave their guns at home.”
But proponents of expanding carry rights to include bars said the change makes sense because Georgia already allows guns in restaurants that serve alcohol.
“If you walk into Applebee’s there’s a bar right in the middle of the place. Is that a bar or a restaurant?” said Jerry Henry, executive director of Georgia Carry. “We want to get all of the vagaries out of the law so that if it’s private property, the owner has the right to ask me to leave, but the sheriff shouldn’t arrest me if I didn’t know I was breaking a law.”
Henry added that opponents’ warnings of increased crime inside bars won’t come to pass.
“The gun prohibitionists are real good at blowing everything out of proportion,” Henry said, pointing to activists’ dire predictions several years ago when Georgia legalized guns in restaurants. “They said servers would get shot if a steak was too rare or there would be a gun draw over the last chicken wing. It just hasn’t happened and it’s not going to happen this time.”
But Piyali Cole, the head of the Georgia chapter of Moms Demand Action, which opposed the bill, said the new language allowing guns in bars will make Georgians less safe and pointed to a recent string of fights leading to shootouts in Georgia parking lots as an example.
“Now those shootouts can happen without ever leaving the bar,” Cole said. “That to us it is hugely frightening. We’ve talked to bar owners and it’s frightening for them, too.”
Cole said she’s encountered the same confusion over the law that Alisa Cleek reported and that she has encountered widespread opposition to the bill, even among Republicans and gun owners, who think the new law is too expansive.
“The bill is monstrous. We fought it tooth and nail,” she said. “We know the public does not want this type of legislation to go through.” To Cole’s point, a poll conducted for the Atlanta Journal Constitution two months before the law went into effect showed 59% of Georgians oppose it. The bill passed the state House and Senate this year with bipartisan support, including the vote of Democratic Senate Sen. Jason Carter. Carter’s target in this year's governor’s race, Gov. Nathan Deal, signed the bill in April.
“I know we are supposed to believe that everybody walking around with a gun is normal behavior, but I reject that,” Cole said. “This is not normal behavior, nor a visual we want our kids to see. I don’t want my son to see his teacher packing. When we see people walking and flaunting guns out in the open, it’s frightening.”
“So are we afraid?” Cole said of Georgians living under the new law. “Yes, we’re afraid.”
‘Guns in Bars’ Bill Kicks Off in Georgia
Fear and confusion reigned in Georgia as the state’s controversial gun law came into effect and bar owners admitted they didn’t know what to do.
Doing shots” in Georgia bars may have a whole new meaning when HB60 goes into effect Tuesday. The Safe Carry Protection Act, also known as the “guns everywhere bill,” broadly expands the places where Georgians can carry firearms to include municipal buildings, public libraries, schools, churches, unsecured areas of airports, and bars.
While churches and schools have to opt in to the law for the expanded carry provisions to apply to them, bar owners must opt out of the legislation by posting a “no-guns” sign or removing heat-packing patrons themselves.
“The onus is now on the bar owner,” said Alisa Cleek, a partner with Elarbee Thompson law firm in Atlanta who co-chairs the firm’s restaurant advisory group. “If you don’t want weapons on your premises you have to take steps to make sure customers know that. You don’t get to sit back this time.”
Cleek said she’s seen significant confusion about how the law will apply to bars, but Georgia Attorney General Sam Olen’s office has declined to give specific guidance on bar owners’ rights and responsibilities under the new law because of potential litigation in the future.
“The answer is there is no answer,” said one highly placed state employee about the specifics of the bill.
With hours left until it went into effect, most bar owners, managers and bartenders across the state contacted by The Daily Beast were unaware that the law would go into effect Tuesday. Some knew the bill had been introduced, but did not know it had passed the legislature. Others knew it was going into effect soon, but did not know what they needed to do to keep guns out of their businesses if that’s what they wanted to do.
“That’s a good question,” became the most frequent response Monday when asked what a bar’s gun policy would be on Tuesday.
Among the handful of bars that knew the bill had passed and would go live Tuesday, all brought up the obvious problems of having guns in the same place where people would be drinking, in some cases heavily, late into the night.
“It just seems like something that could lead to trouble,” said Jonathan List at Moe’s and Joe’s, a local Atlanta fixture that sells Pabst Blue Ribbon by the $6.50 pitcher. List said the bar’s owners will likely post a “no guns” sign for customers once the law goes into effect.
"I'm a gun owner myself, but I don’t take my gun when I go drinking because I think it’s a bad idea.”
Down the street at Limerick Junction, an Irish bar with a clientele of “locals, young professionals and young not-so-professionals,” manager Josh Jacoe said the bar had not finalized its gun policy, but added, “Most of our gun-owning patrons are smart enough to know if they’re going out drinking to leave their guns at home.”
But proponents of expanding carry rights to include bars said the change makes sense because Georgia already allows guns in restaurants that serve alcohol.
“If you walk into Applebee’s there’s a bar right in the middle of the place. Is that a bar or a restaurant?” said Jerry Henry, executive director of Georgia Carry. “We want to get all of the vagaries out of the law so that if it’s private property, the owner has the right to ask me to leave, but the sheriff shouldn’t arrest me if I didn’t know I was breaking a law.”
Henry added that opponents’ warnings of increased crime inside bars won’t come to pass.
“The gun prohibitionists are real good at blowing everything out of proportion,” Henry said, pointing to activists’ dire predictions several years ago when Georgia legalized guns in restaurants. “They said servers would get shot if a steak was too rare or there would be a gun draw over the last chicken wing. It just hasn’t happened and it’s not going to happen this time.”
But Piyali Cole, the head of the Georgia chapter of Moms Demand Action, which opposed the bill, said the new language allowing guns in bars will make Georgians less safe and pointed to a recent string of fights leading to shootouts in Georgia parking lots as an example.
“Now those shootouts can happen without ever leaving the bar,” Cole said. “That to us it is hugely frightening. We’ve talked to bar owners and it’s frightening for them, too.”
Cole said she’s encountered the same confusion over the law that Alisa Cleek reported and that she has encountered widespread opposition to the bill, even among Republicans and gun owners, who think the new law is too expansive.
“The bill is monstrous. We fought it tooth and nail,” she said. “We know the public does not want this type of legislation to go through.” To Cole’s point, a poll conducted for the Atlanta Journal Constitution two months before the law went into effect showed 59% of Georgians oppose it. The bill passed the state House and Senate this year with bipartisan support, including the vote of Democratic Senate Sen. Jason Carter. Carter’s target in this year's governor’s race, Gov. Nathan Deal, signed the bill in April.
“I know we are supposed to believe that everybody walking around with a gun is normal behavior, but I reject that,” Cole said. “This is not normal behavior, nor a visual we want our kids to see. I don’t want my son to see his teacher packing. When we see people walking and flaunting guns out in the open, it’s frightening.”
“So are we afraid?” Cole said of Georgians living under the new law. “Yes, we’re afraid.”
Another one from Georgia...
Dkos Diary. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...isagreement-on-1st-day-of-Guns-Everywhere-law
First day of new gun law leads to arrest.
The police report that they have been 'concerned' that people will 'take the law into their own hands' with regards to who has a permit or otherwise, and the police add they can't even ask.
Not a lot to add: yesterday was the first day this nutty law was actually in effect and it didn't take long for problems to surface.
But don't smoke marijuana. That's dangerous.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Some of the comments on the Valdosta site (second link above):
Let the idiots, and the games begin. Who thinks that in todays rude, and disrespectful world, that allowing more guns everywhere, and then taking away a police officers right ask for permits, is a good idea?
It's gonna be fun for y'all when the thug life set goes walking around sporting guns in plain sight. Southern white people love mingling with black people carrying guns. Have a drink and celebrate because alcohol will make it all even more fun!
Open Carry Gun Law + Stand Your Ground Law = Darwinian solution to gun-toting crazies.
There you have it: "Stand Your Ground" collides with "Open Carry". How the heck can anybody tell which is the 'good guy' with a gun?
Open carry gun nuts are making themselves the most persuasive possible argument for gun control. Swaggering around with a visible weapon has zero to do with your "rights" and everything to do with your own personal pathology of intimidation.
Dkos Diary. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...isagreement-on-1st-day-of-Guns-Everywhere-law
First day of new gun law leads to arrest.
The police report that they have been 'concerned' that people will 'take the law into their own hands' with regards to who has a permit or otherwise, and the police add they can't even ask.
Not a lot to add: yesterday was the first day this nutty law was actually in effect and it didn't take long for problems to surface.
But don't smoke marijuana. That's dangerous.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Some of the comments on the Valdosta site (second link above):
Let the idiots, and the games begin. Who thinks that in todays rude, and disrespectful world, that allowing more guns everywhere, and then taking away a police officers right ask for permits, is a good idea?
It's gonna be fun for y'all when the thug life set goes walking around sporting guns in plain sight. Southern white people love mingling with black people carrying guns. Have a drink and celebrate because alcohol will make it all even more fun!
Open Carry Gun Law + Stand Your Ground Law = Darwinian solution to gun-toting crazies.
There you have it: "Stand Your Ground" collides with "Open Carry". How the heck can anybody tell which is the 'good guy' with a gun?
Open carry gun nuts are making themselves the most persuasive possible argument for gun control. Swaggering around with a visible weapon has zero to do with your "rights" and everything to do with your own personal pathology of intimidation.
Last edited:
A week and half ago, I attened a community meeting held by my state representative and a county police captain briefing us on the specifics and concerns of the guns anywhere law.
The captain was not happy about this law. He said he is originally from the NYC area like myself and even after living in the south for 15 plus years was still astounded at the passing of this law. Suffice it to say, he felt that it was going to make his job much more difficult.
The state representative, who is Black, was just has frustrated, but seem to resign himself to the fact that the law was pasted because, in his words. "there were more of them voting for it than us voting against it."
There was a women living alone who admitted she was actually afraid now and said she felt she had to purchase a gun.
I guess that is ultimately the intention of the law. To spur gun sales.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/6mPsIc8xr3E" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
States look to gun seizure law after mass killings
States look to gun seizure law after mass killings
By DAVE COLLINS
1 hour ago
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — As state officials across the country grapple with how to prevent mass killings like the ones at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown and near the University of California, Santa Barbara, some are turning to a gun seizure law pioneered in Connecticut 15 years ago.
Connecticut's law allows judges to order guns temporarily seized after police present evidence that a person is a danger to themselves or others. A court hearing must be held within 14 days to determine whether to return the guns or authorize the state to hold them for up to a year.
The 1999 law, the first of its kind in the country, was in response to the 1998 killings of four managers at the Connecticut Lottery headquarters by a disgruntled employee with a history of psychiatric problems.
Indiana is the only other state that has such a law, passed in 2005 after an Indianapolis police officer was shot to death by a mentally ill man. California and New Jersey lawmakers are now considering similar statutes, both proposed in the wake of the killings of six people and wounding of 13 others near the University of California, Santa Barbara by a mentally ill man who had posted threatening videos on YouTube.
Michael Lawlor, Connecticut's undersecretary for criminal justice planning and policy, believes the state's gun seizure law could have prevented the killings of 20 first-graders and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in December 2012, if police had been made aware that gunman Adam Lanza had mental health problems and access to his mother's legally owned guns.
"That's the kind of situation where you see the red flags and the warning signs are there, you do something about it," Lawlor said. "In many shootings around the country, after the fact it's clear that the warning signs were there."
Gun rights advocates oppose gun seizure laws, saying they allow police to take people's firearms based only on allegations and before the gun owners can present their side of the story to a judge. They say they're concerned the laws violate constitutional rights.
"The government taking things away from people is never a good thing," said Rich Burgess, president of the gun rights group Connecticut Carry. "They come take your stuff and give you 14 days for a hearing. Would anybody else be OK if they just came and took your car and gave you 14 days for a hearing?"
Rachel Baird, a Connecticut lawyer who has represented many gun owners, said one of the biggest problems with the state's law is that police are abusing it. She said she has had eight clients whose guns were seized by police who obtained the required warrants after taking possession of the guns.
"It's stretched and abused, and since it's firearms, the courts go along with it," Baird said of the law.
But backers of such laws say they can prevent shootings by getting guns out of the hands of mentally disturbed people.
"You want to make sure that when people are in crisis ... there is a way to prevent them to get access to firearms," said Josh Horwitz, executive director of the nonprofit Education Fund to Stop Gun Violence in Washington, D.C.
Connecticut authorities report a large increase in the use of gun seizure warrants involving people deemed dangerous by police over the past several years. Officials aren't exactly sure what caused the increase but believe it's related to numerous highly publicized mass shootings in recent years.
Police statewide filed an estimated 183 executed gun seizure warrants with court clerks last year, more than twice the number filed in 2010, according to Connecticut Judicial Branch data. Last year's total also was nearly nine times higher than the annual average in the first five years of the gun seizure law.
Connecticut police have seized more than 2,000 guns using the warrants, according to the most recent estimate by state officials, in 2009.
Police in South Windsor, about 12 miles northeast of Hartford, say the law was invaluable last year when they seized several guns from the home of a man accused of spray-painting graffiti referencing mass shootings in Newtown and Colorado on the outside of the town's high school.
"With all that we see in the news day after day, particular after Newtown, I think departments are more aware of what authority they have ... and they're using the tool (gun seizure warrants) more frequently than in the past," said South Windsor Police Chief Matthew Reed. "We always look at it from the other side. What if we don't seize the guns?"
http://news.yahoo.com/states-look-gun-seizure-law-mass-killings-152120496.html
States look to gun seizure law after mass killings
By DAVE COLLINS
1 hour ago
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — As state officials across the country grapple with how to prevent mass killings like the ones at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown and near the University of California, Santa Barbara, some are turning to a gun seizure law pioneered in Connecticut 15 years ago.
Connecticut's law allows judges to order guns temporarily seized after police present evidence that a person is a danger to themselves or others. A court hearing must be held within 14 days to determine whether to return the guns or authorize the state to hold them for up to a year.
The 1999 law, the first of its kind in the country, was in response to the 1998 killings of four managers at the Connecticut Lottery headquarters by a disgruntled employee with a history of psychiatric problems.
Indiana is the only other state that has such a law, passed in 2005 after an Indianapolis police officer was shot to death by a mentally ill man. California and New Jersey lawmakers are now considering similar statutes, both proposed in the wake of the killings of six people and wounding of 13 others near the University of California, Santa Barbara by a mentally ill man who had posted threatening videos on YouTube.
Michael Lawlor, Connecticut's undersecretary for criminal justice planning and policy, believes the state's gun seizure law could have prevented the killings of 20 first-graders and six educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School in December 2012, if police had been made aware that gunman Adam Lanza had mental health problems and access to his mother's legally owned guns.
"That's the kind of situation where you see the red flags and the warning signs are there, you do something about it," Lawlor said. "In many shootings around the country, after the fact it's clear that the warning signs were there."
Gun rights advocates oppose gun seizure laws, saying they allow police to take people's firearms based only on allegations and before the gun owners can present their side of the story to a judge. They say they're concerned the laws violate constitutional rights.
"The government taking things away from people is never a good thing," said Rich Burgess, president of the gun rights group Connecticut Carry. "They come take your stuff and give you 14 days for a hearing. Would anybody else be OK if they just came and took your car and gave you 14 days for a hearing?"
Rachel Baird, a Connecticut lawyer who has represented many gun owners, said one of the biggest problems with the state's law is that police are abusing it. She said she has had eight clients whose guns were seized by police who obtained the required warrants after taking possession of the guns.
"It's stretched and abused, and since it's firearms, the courts go along with it," Baird said of the law.
But backers of such laws say they can prevent shootings by getting guns out of the hands of mentally disturbed people.
"You want to make sure that when people are in crisis ... there is a way to prevent them to get access to firearms," said Josh Horwitz, executive director of the nonprofit Education Fund to Stop Gun Violence in Washington, D.C.
Connecticut authorities report a large increase in the use of gun seizure warrants involving people deemed dangerous by police over the past several years. Officials aren't exactly sure what caused the increase but believe it's related to numerous highly publicized mass shootings in recent years.
Police statewide filed an estimated 183 executed gun seizure warrants with court clerks last year, more than twice the number filed in 2010, according to Connecticut Judicial Branch data. Last year's total also was nearly nine times higher than the annual average in the first five years of the gun seizure law.
Connecticut police have seized more than 2,000 guns using the warrants, according to the most recent estimate by state officials, in 2009.
Police in South Windsor, about 12 miles northeast of Hartford, say the law was invaluable last year when they seized several guns from the home of a man accused of spray-painting graffiti referencing mass shootings in Newtown and Colorado on the outside of the town's high school.
"With all that we see in the news day after day, particular after Newtown, I think departments are more aware of what authority they have ... and they're using the tool (gun seizure warrants) more frequently than in the past," said South Windsor Police Chief Matthew Reed. "We always look at it from the other side. What if we don't seize the guns?"
http://news.yahoo.com/states-look-gun-seizure-law-mass-killings-152120496.html
Re: States look to gun seizure law after mass killings
You're heading in the right direction. Now, if we could also "seriously" consider a registration law aimed at preventing guns from coming into the hands of those same persons -- we'd be that much farther along.
You're heading in the right direction. Now, if we could also "seriously" consider a registration law aimed at preventing guns from coming into the hands of those same persons -- we'd be that much farther along.
One In The Same?
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/AlszrR-1nz4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
BALTIMORE
Mother Demanding Answers After 3-Year-Old Killed
In Drive-By Shooting
August 2, 2014
http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2014/08/02/toddler-killed-in-drive-by-shooting/
In Drive-By Shooting
August 2, 2014
http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2014/08/02/toddler-killed-in-drive-by-shooting/
PHILADELPHIA
3-year-old girl shot,
killed while getting her hair done on porch
August 1, 2014
killed while getting her hair done on porch
August 1, 2014
Police and witnesses in Philadelphia say a 3-year-old girl who was
sitting on her front porch getting her hair done was killed when a
man opened fire during an argument. Three adults were injured.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...ooting-police-article-1.1889293#ixzz39RyyxtWS
That dumb shit needs to stop
James Brady, former Reagan press secretary,
gun-control advocate, dies
August 4, 2014
<iframe width='416' height='234' src='http://www.cnn.com/video/api/embed.html#/video/bestoftv/2014/08/04/sot-wh-press-secretary-james-brady-dead.cnn' frameborder='0'></iframe>
gun-control advocate, dies
August 4, 2014
<iframe width='416' height='234' src='http://www.cnn.com/video/api/embed.html#/video/bestoftv/2014/08/04/sot-wh-press-secretary-james-brady-dead.cnn' frameborder='0'></iframe>
James Brady, former press secretary to Ronald Reagan who was shot in the head in a 1981 assassination attempt on the President, has died, the White House said on Monday.
He was 73.
Following the shooting of Reagan in Washington that left Brady partially paralyzed and in a wheelchair, he became one of the nation's most prominent gun-control advocates.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/04/politics/james-brady-dies/index.html
He was 73.
Following the shooting of Reagan in Washington that left Brady partially paralyzed and in a wheelchair, he became one of the nation's most prominent gun-control advocates.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/04/politics/james-brady-dies/index.html
Federal judge overturns Washington DC ban on guns in public
Federal judge overturns Washington DC ban on guns in public
July 26, 2014 8:42 PM
Washington (AFP) - A federal judge has ruled that a ban on citizens carrying handguns in public in the US capital Washington DC is unconstitutional.
In a 19-page opinion, Judge Frederick Scullin on Saturday ruled that "there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia's total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny.
"Therefore," Scullin wrote, "the Court finds that the District of Columbia's complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional."
It is unclear whether the defendants -- the District of Columbia as represented by Police Chief Cathy Lanier -- will appeal the ruling.
The lawsuit plaintiffs include Tom Palmer, a Washington resident who was denied a permit to openly carry a handgun for self-defense, and the Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., a gun rights advocacy group.
Currently 44 of the 50 US states allow people to openly carry handguns.
In his ruling Scullin made reference to a 2008 US Supreme Court case, District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the plaintiff argued that the city's ban on firearm ownership -- one of the strictest in the nation -- was unconstitutional.
In a 5-4 decision the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, Dick Anthony Heller, a local police officer who wanted to have a private weapon at home.
- Gun rights v limits -
Americans for years have been attempting to balance the rights in the Second Amendment to the US Constitution with the authority of local officials to control gun use and ownership.
The Second Amendment, approved in 1791, reads: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Much of the debate, handled in court cases over the years, has been over what authority local, state and federal officials have in regulating and controlling firearms.
Washington DC is a unique case because the US capital has an elected mayor and city council, but no voting representation in Congress.
Also, Congress has ultimate authority over the city's budget and can even overturn local laws.
The city passed strict gun laws -- now overturned -- in 1975 to combat a soaring homicide rate. By the 1990s Washington was one of the deadliest cities in the country, in part because of a crack cocaine epidemic. Violent crime however has since plummeted compared to other major US cities.
Washington is also wedged between the states of Virginia, which allows people to openly carry a gun, and Maryland, which has stricter rules on gun ownership.
In a recent spending bill the Republican-controlled House on July 16 approved rolling back the city's decriminalization of small amounts of marijuana as well as its limits on gun use. The final bill however still must be negotiated with the White House and the Senate.
http://news.yahoo.com/federal-judge-overturns-washington-dc-ban-guns-public-004205494.html
Federal judge overturns Washington DC ban on guns in public
July 26, 2014 8:42 PM
Washington (AFP) - A federal judge has ruled that a ban on citizens carrying handguns in public in the US capital Washington DC is unconstitutional.
In a 19-page opinion, Judge Frederick Scullin on Saturday ruled that "there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia's total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny.
"Therefore," Scullin wrote, "the Court finds that the District of Columbia's complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional."
It is unclear whether the defendants -- the District of Columbia as represented by Police Chief Cathy Lanier -- will appeal the ruling.
The lawsuit plaintiffs include Tom Palmer, a Washington resident who was denied a permit to openly carry a handgun for self-defense, and the Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., a gun rights advocacy group.
Currently 44 of the 50 US states allow people to openly carry handguns.
In his ruling Scullin made reference to a 2008 US Supreme Court case, District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the plaintiff argued that the city's ban on firearm ownership -- one of the strictest in the nation -- was unconstitutional.
In a 5-4 decision the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, Dick Anthony Heller, a local police officer who wanted to have a private weapon at home.
- Gun rights v limits -
Americans for years have been attempting to balance the rights in the Second Amendment to the US Constitution with the authority of local officials to control gun use and ownership.
The Second Amendment, approved in 1791, reads: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Much of the debate, handled in court cases over the years, has been over what authority local, state and federal officials have in regulating and controlling firearms.
Washington DC is a unique case because the US capital has an elected mayor and city council, but no voting representation in Congress.
Also, Congress has ultimate authority over the city's budget and can even overturn local laws.
The city passed strict gun laws -- now overturned -- in 1975 to combat a soaring homicide rate. By the 1990s Washington was one of the deadliest cities in the country, in part because of a crack cocaine epidemic. Violent crime however has since plummeted compared to other major US cities.
Washington is also wedged between the states of Virginia, which allows people to openly carry a gun, and Maryland, which has stricter rules on gun ownership.
In a recent spending bill the Republican-controlled House on July 16 approved rolling back the city's decriminalization of small amounts of marijuana as well as its limits on gun use. The final bill however still must be negotiated with the White House and the Senate.
http://news.yahoo.com/federal-judge-overturns-washington-dc-ban-guns-public-004205494.html
The State of Washington has put Initiative 594 on the Ballot
calling for Universal Background Checks for Gun Purchases;
One Poll Indicates 72% Support In Favor of The Initiative.
If approved by voters, the measure would require background checks to be run on every person purchasing a gun in the state of Washington, even those who are doing so via private sales. However, transfers of antique guns and those between immediate family members would be exempt from the background checks. The measure also requires that dealers who are facilitating gun transfers, be they through the licensed dealer or a private seller, receive confirmation in writing from the chief of police or sheriff that the purchaser in question "is eligible to possess a pistol [...] and that the application to purchase is approved by the chief of police or sheriff." Furthermore, the initiative would render it illegal to hand off a firearm to people outside a person's immediate family, though exceptions are mentioned, including situations in which people are at a shooting range or hunting.
SEE: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...ifWxrf-_KAcziwtSQ&sig2=NTFr2qHP-bqEPe4ALfl9KA
More insanity!
source: NBC News
Arizona Shooting Range Instructor Killed by Girl With Uzi
<address class="stack-byline">By Hasani Gittens</address> A shooting range instructor in Arizona was accidentally shot and killed by a 9-year-old girl who was learning how to shoot an Uzi, authorities said on Tuesday.
Charles Vacca, 39, was teaching the girl how to use the automatic weapon on Monday morning at the Last Stop outdoor shooting range in White Hills, Arizona, when she pulled the trigger and the kickback caused the gun to lurch over her head, investigators said.
Vacca was hit by a stray bullet and airlifted to University Medical Center in Las Vegas, where he was pronounced dead late Monday. The girl was at the range with her parents at the time, but their names were not released.
Sam Scarmardo, the manager for the Last Stop's shooting range, told NBC News that "the established practice at most shooting ranges is 8 years old and up with parental supervision."
He said Vacca was a "great guy, with a great sense of humor" and called him "very conscientious and very professional."
Scarmardo said that the range has never had a similar incident in over a decade of being open — "not even a scratch."
"I just ask everybody to pray for Charlie, and pray for the client, she’s going to have a hard time," said Scarmardo.
The Arizona Department of Public Safety referred inquiries to the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, which didn't return calls for comment.
Ronald Scott, a Phoenix-based firearms safety expert, said most instructors usually have their hands on guns when children are firing high-powered weapons. "You can't give a 9-year-old an Uzi and expect her to control it," Scott told the Associated Press.
source: NBC News
Arizona Shooting Range Instructor Killed by Girl With Uzi
<address class="stack-byline">By Hasani Gittens</address> A shooting range instructor in Arizona was accidentally shot and killed by a 9-year-old girl who was learning how to shoot an Uzi, authorities said on Tuesday.
Charles Vacca, 39, was teaching the girl how to use the automatic weapon on Monday morning at the Last Stop outdoor shooting range in White Hills, Arizona, when she pulled the trigger and the kickback caused the gun to lurch over her head, investigators said.
Vacca was hit by a stray bullet and airlifted to University Medical Center in Las Vegas, where he was pronounced dead late Monday. The girl was at the range with her parents at the time, but their names were not released.
Sam Scarmardo, the manager for the Last Stop's shooting range, told NBC News that "the established practice at most shooting ranges is 8 years old and up with parental supervision."
He said Vacca was a "great guy, with a great sense of humor" and called him "very conscientious and very professional."
Scarmardo said that the range has never had a similar incident in over a decade of being open — "not even a scratch."
"I just ask everybody to pray for Charlie, and pray for the client, she’s going to have a hard time," said Scarmardo.
The Arizona Department of Public Safety referred inquiries to the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, which didn't return calls for comment.
Ronald Scott, a Phoenix-based firearms safety expert, said most instructors usually have their hands on guns when children are firing high-powered weapons. "You can't give a 9-year-old an Uzi and expect her to control it," Scott told the Associated Press.
and more people have died in car accidents than ebola ever......
so I guess we need to ban the automobile also right?
liberalism is a disease.....period.
and more people have died in car accidents than ebola ever......
so I guess we need to ban the automobile also right?
liberalism is a disease.....period.
If you can think of another use for a gun other than to kill or maim, then yes, ban automobiles.
The mind of a right winger!
source: Liberals Unite
Alex Jones Bullies Mass Shooting Victim’s Parents
Alex Jones bullies Lonnie and Sandy Philips whose 24-year-old daughter Jessica was murdered in the 2012 gun massacre at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, in this clip we found earlier today from Mother Jones. [You might also want to check out Bostonian Owns Conspiracy Theory Reporter from Alex Jones’ InfoWars (VIDEO)]
As Mother Jones reports: “Last October, hundreds of armed people gathered for a rally at the Alamo in San Antonio, where Open Carry Texas had invited Alex Jones, the fringe radio host known for whipping up fans with squalls of anti-government paranoia.
Alex Jones Bullies Mass Shooting Victim’s Parents
Alex Jones bullies Lonnie and Sandy Philips whose 24-year-old daughter Jessica was murdered in the 2012 gun massacre at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, in this clip we found earlier today from Mother Jones. [You might also want to check out Bostonian Owns Conspiracy Theory Reporter from Alex Jones’ InfoWars (VIDEO)]
As Mother Jones reports: “Last October, hundreds of armed people gathered for a rally at the Alamo in San Antonio, where Open Carry Texas had invited Alex Jones, the fringe radio host known for whipping up fans with squalls of anti-government paranoia.
At the podium, an assault rifle strapped across his back, Jones got into such a lather about Hitler and Mao and the Obama administration preparing to “enslave” Americans that he blew out his voice in less than five minutes. “These scumbags are all the same!” he shouted. He described a worldwide conspiracy to take away everyone’s guns, whose perpetrators included “the few dozen Democratic Party operatives they’re gonna have marching here in a little while, the so-called moms.”
[...]
Jones then hugged CJ Grisham [founder of Texas Open-Carry] before heading out to, as he would later put it on his show, “confront the victim disarmament crew.” He went to a local taco bar about a mile away, where Moms Demand Action was holding a midday kids’ event with crafts and family activities. Jones and his camera crew began cornering members of the group. The women told him they weren’t interested in talking on camera, but he kept at it.
As you can see in the video below, an elderly gentleman approached Jones to intervene telling him: “A gun grab is something that nobody in this country wants” at which point the two of them began bickering and Jones starting getting in the man’s face with his hands gesticulating and his chest puffed up.
At one point, the man’s wife tried to pull him away. “All right, go ahead,” Jones responded, adding “listen, I don’t want to beat an old guy up,” and poking his chest continues: “so don’t touch me.”
Eventually, Stephanie Lundy of Moms Demand Action approached Jones’ sidekick, Anthony Gucciardi, and informed him that the couple was Lonnie and Sandy Philips, whose 24-year-old daughter Jessica was murdered in the 2012 gun massacre at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado.
However, Jones kept on accosting the couple saying: “Did you know assault rifles are used in 2 percent of crimes?”
Lonnie Phillips had enough and responded: “I know an assault rifle was used to murder my daughter in Aurora,” he snapped back, his voice rising.
You can watch the confrontation, below:
<iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/8M-zzgjvMRA" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" width="560"></iframe>[...]
Jones then hugged CJ Grisham [founder of Texas Open-Carry] before heading out to, as he would later put it on his show, “confront the victim disarmament crew.” He went to a local taco bar about a mile away, where Moms Demand Action was holding a midday kids’ event with crafts and family activities. Jones and his camera crew began cornering members of the group. The women told him they weren’t interested in talking on camera, but he kept at it.
As you can see in the video below, an elderly gentleman approached Jones to intervene telling him: “A gun grab is something that nobody in this country wants” at which point the two of them began bickering and Jones starting getting in the man’s face with his hands gesticulating and his chest puffed up.
At one point, the man’s wife tried to pull him away. “All right, go ahead,” Jones responded, adding “listen, I don’t want to beat an old guy up,” and poking his chest continues: “so don’t touch me.”
Eventually, Stephanie Lundy of Moms Demand Action approached Jones’ sidekick, Anthony Gucciardi, and informed him that the couple was Lonnie and Sandy Philips, whose 24-year-old daughter Jessica was murdered in the 2012 gun massacre at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado.
However, Jones kept on accosting the couple saying: “Did you know assault rifles are used in 2 percent of crimes?”
Lonnie Phillips had enough and responded: “I know an assault rifle was used to murder my daughter in Aurora,” he snapped back, his voice rising.
You can watch the confrontation, below:
and more people have died in car accidents than ebola ever......
so I guess we need to ban the automobile also right?
liberalism is a disease.....period.
No need to ban them; but they are required to be registered are they not ???
source: Fox 13
Washington voters approving I-594 to expand gun background checks
SEATTLE — Washington voters were approving Initiative 594 to expand background checks on nearly all gun sales, initial results showed Tuesday night.
With 1.2 million votes counted, I-594 was leading 60-40% and its rival measure, I-591, which would limit gun background checks, was losing 55-45%.
I-594 would require background checks on all gun sales except for antique guns and family transfers.
<script height="433px" width="770px" src="http://player.ooyala.com/iframe.js#pbid=c8cff4cec9d94ae0896f6443af7ee837&ec=RzOHJpcTpq-TMag53ceH7ZH4Du9c9r0X"></script><iframe webkitallowfullscreen="true" src="http://player.ooyala.com/iframe.html#pbid=c8cff4cec9d94ae0896f6443af7ee837&ec=RzOHJpcTpq-TMag53ceH7ZH4Du9c9r0X&docUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bgol.us%2Fboard%2Fnewreply.php%3Fdo%3Dpostreply%26t%3D679782" frameborder="0" height="433px" width="770px"></iframe>
Seattle Mayor Ed Murray said, “Today, Washington has made a significant commitment to gun safety for all. States with universal background checks have fewer women killed in domestic violence situations, fewer law enforcement officers shot and fewer firearm suicides.
“As the first state to pass this by popular vote, Washington has sent a message of hope to other states that progress is possible. We can act to prevent gun violence. We can save lives.”
In the only other statewide measure, I-1351 to reduce class sizes in public schools was slightly losing 51-49% and too close to call. It was a 14,000 vote margin with nearly 1.2 million votes cast.
In Seattle, Proposition 1 to stave off Metro Transit bus cuts in the city by raising revenue was passing 59-41%.
“Great cities need great mass transit – and Seattle is a great city,” Murray said.
“Seattle voters have entrusted us with new resources, and taxpayers must have confidence that they will get value for their money. I pledge that the city will use this money responsibly. We are working with Metro on strict accountability measures that ensure that this funding is used to improve transit services here in Seattle in areas of greatest need.”
And Mayor Ed Murray’s Pre-K education for Seattle children was passing with 67% of the vote.
“The passage of Proposition 1B is a huge win for Seattle’s kids and for Seattle’s future,” Murray said. “Tonight marks the beginning of the end of Seattle’s achievement and opportunity gap. Tonight marks a significant step toward making Seattle a city where students of all races and incomes are able to succeed in our public schools.”
Washington voters approving I-594 to expand gun background checks
SEATTLE — Washington voters were approving Initiative 594 to expand background checks on nearly all gun sales, initial results showed Tuesday night.
With 1.2 million votes counted, I-594 was leading 60-40% and its rival measure, I-591, which would limit gun background checks, was losing 55-45%.
I-594 would require background checks on all gun sales except for antique guns and family transfers.
<script height="433px" width="770px" src="http://player.ooyala.com/iframe.js#pbid=c8cff4cec9d94ae0896f6443af7ee837&ec=RzOHJpcTpq-TMag53ceH7ZH4Du9c9r0X"></script><iframe webkitallowfullscreen="true" src="http://player.ooyala.com/iframe.html#pbid=c8cff4cec9d94ae0896f6443af7ee837&ec=RzOHJpcTpq-TMag53ceH7ZH4Du9c9r0X&docUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bgol.us%2Fboard%2Fnewreply.php%3Fdo%3Dpostreply%26t%3D679782" frameborder="0" height="433px" width="770px"></iframe>
Seattle Mayor Ed Murray said, “Today, Washington has made a significant commitment to gun safety for all. States with universal background checks have fewer women killed in domestic violence situations, fewer law enforcement officers shot and fewer firearm suicides.
“As the first state to pass this by popular vote, Washington has sent a message of hope to other states that progress is possible. We can act to prevent gun violence. We can save lives.”
In the only other statewide measure, I-1351 to reduce class sizes in public schools was slightly losing 51-49% and too close to call. It was a 14,000 vote margin with nearly 1.2 million votes cast.
In Seattle, Proposition 1 to stave off Metro Transit bus cuts in the city by raising revenue was passing 59-41%.
“Great cities need great mass transit – and Seattle is a great city,” Murray said.
“Seattle voters have entrusted us with new resources, and taxpayers must have confidence that they will get value for their money. I pledge that the city will use this money responsibly. We are working with Metro on strict accountability measures that ensure that this funding is used to improve transit services here in Seattle in areas of greatest need.”
And Mayor Ed Murray’s Pre-K education for Seattle children was passing with 67% of the vote.
“The passage of Proposition 1B is a huge win for Seattle’s kids and for Seattle’s future,” Murray said. “Tonight marks the beginning of the end of Seattle’s achievement and opportunity gap. Tonight marks a significant step toward making Seattle a city where students of all races and incomes are able to succeed in our public schools.”