Gun politics thread

pgkor38n85g31.jpg
 
NBC - Student who opened fire at California high school, killing 2, used 'ghost gun'
A teen who opened fire at his California high school, killing two students, used a "ghost gun" built from firearm parts, the Los Angeles County sheriff said.

The weapon was a "kit gun" with no serial numbers, and another kit gun was found at the family's home, Sheriff Alex Villanueva told television station KABC.

It was unclear who assembled the gun. Weapons assembled at home, allowing owners to avoid registering them, are commonly called ghost guns.

More media lies :roll:

Kit guns absolutely DO have serial numbers. Kits typically include everything except the lower receiver or frame and when you purchase those they are serialized and a dealer has to run a background check on the buyer.

One way to have a lower receiver without a serial number is to literally make one. I seriously doubt that this teenager had access to CNC machinery and possessed the skills to make a lower. Furthermore, even if he did manage to do that, he still broke the law by failing to register it as required by state law.
 
California also requires:

1. A background check to purchase any ammunition whatsoever.
2. Ammunition must be purchased in person, no mail order sales of any kind.
3. Already have a firearm registered in their system or pass an additional background check.

https://www.calwaterfowl.org/navigating-californias-new-ammunition-background-check-system/

And, of course, the purchaser must be at least 18 or 21.

Since all of this was sold to the populace as helping to stop these mass shootings... the question the government and the press seems to be studiously avoiding is, "Where did the underage shooter get his ammunition?" A firearm without ammunition is at best an unwieldy club or spear, which was the intended point of these restrictions. So where did this guy get his ammo? No company from out of state will sell into California after this regulation was passed, and I doubt the ammo was legally bought over the counter or legally transferred to the shooter.
 
10 seconds. 3 shots. 3 dead. The video makes you shiver.

It is impossible to avoid asking what would have happened if weapons were harder to come by for the shooter, but it is also impossible to avoid asking what would have happened if the other citizens hadn't been there, and quite well prepared, to stop him.

The guy who stopped the shooter hit from.... what? 10 meters? under quite a lot of stress (but never even tried to cover before shooting).
 
The guy that stopped this nutcase was a long time firearms instructor, Jack Wilson.

The gentleman closest to the shooter got a chest load of buckshot as he had his piece behind his back and had to stand to draw. I believe he perished, however this gave Jack an opportunity to put a 357 Sig in the shooter's dome.

Jack shot a moving target in the head, under stress, from 15ish feet while surrounded by innocents.

For those of us with the means to protect ourselves with deadly force: train, train, train.

EDIT: Also want to take this opportunity to mention that medical skills are just as valuable, if not more so. Take a basic medical course, learn how to apply a tourniquet, familiarize yourself with MARCH, etc.
 
Last edited:
It is impossible to avoid asking what would have happened if weapons were harder to come by for the shooter...
Nothing we can really do about that, for better or for worse.


...but it is also impossible to avoid asking what would have happened if the other citizens hadn't been there, and quite well prepared, to stop him.
I can think of just three mass shooting attempts in Texas: Mohammad art exhibit in Garland where the bad guy got shot before he even entered the building; Sutherland Springs church shooter who was gunned down by a neighbor with his AR15; and this church shooting where six people drew on the bad guy. I'm starting to think that "don't mess with Texas" isn't just a cute catchphrase...


but never even tried to cover before shooting.
As much as I'm tempted to, I'm not going to Monday morning quarterback what Jack Wilson did. He got the fucking job done, end of story. My hat is off to him.


Jack shot a moving target in the head, under stress, from 15ish feet while surrounded by innocents.
Really darn good shootin'! I would've sent several rounds to make sure that at least something hit the bastard, but apparently Jack's a better marksman than me. Hell of a shot!


For those of us with the means to protect ourselves with deadly force: train, train, train.
THIS!


EDIT: Also want to take this opportunity to mention that medical skills are just as valuable, if not more so. Take a basic medical course, learn how to apply a tourniquet, familiarize yourself with MARCH, etc.
Do you actually carry a TQ with you though? I have one (and a med kit) in my range bag but I wouldn't have one in this situation.


Final thought: fuck gun-free zones! I really wish I could carry at work like I used to with my old job.
 
Nothing we can really do about that, for better or for worse.

Of course there are: most western countries have less shootings and firearm deaths than the US, so it can be done.

I'm starting to think that "don't mess with Texas" isn't just a cute catchphrase...

It isn't just a catchphrase, but Texas has its fair share of problems since the very high amount of people who actually try to become a mass murderers.

Seriously, I live in a country where most of the time Jack the Guard wouldn't be there to save the day, yet it's quite hard find episodes of a mass murderer shooting people in a public place.

Both questions are important and unavoidable.

As much as I'm tempted to, I'm not going to Monday morning quarterback what Jack Wilson did. He got the fucking job done, end of story. My hat is off to him.

I'm not criticizing him at all, I talked about the basic facts of the great shot he took and the fact that he had trained.

What I put as a secondary element is how close he went to be the third civilian victim, by staying right there right after two others where shot while standing.

It's a fine line, and he took a great risk: praise to him for being successful, warn to him and to others to find a solution to that problem, if there is one.

but apparently Jack's a better marksman than me. Hell of a shot!

Any person who even tried to hit a target with a pistol cannot avoid being amazed by what Jack did.


By the way: as you and Der Stig said, it is always right to have medical training in case something happens. Whatever the cause.

Final thought: fuck gun-free zones! I really wish I could carry at work like I used to with my old job.

Gun-free zones are a two-sided coin, and I understand why you don't like them. Yet the problem is that you live in a place where, during your daily life, you actually have to worry about meeting ill-intentioned people with guns. That is the problem.

As I said, there is no single solution, but surely what you have now is quite far from the best result achievable.
 
Of course there are: most western countries have less shootings and firearm deaths than the US, so it can be done.
There are more guns than people in this country. What's your plan for preventing anyone with bad intentions from acquiring one, whether legally or illegally?
 
There are more guns than people in this country. What's your plan for preventing anyone with bad intentions from acquiring one, whether legally or illegally?

I don't know, but since americans are still human beings, and other human beings manage to, then there surely is a way.

BTW, how did you manage to take a comment that was fundamentally positive on the presence and actions of the armed guards in a church and focus only on the unavoidable question?

It is a good thing that Jack the Guard was armed and trained; it is not a good thing that Texas (or the US, for that matters) needs people like him to protect innocent bystanders from armed mass-murderers. That is not the norm in Western countries, that is the norm in war-zones or unstable countries.
 
Top