Breaking News: Shots Fired Inside Westroads Mall (Omaha)

KETV, Omaha NE ^ | 12/5/2207 | KETV

[Rick.Donaldson]

I realize that in some states, the gun can be transported exposed, but I doubt a reasonable man would walk around in a mall with an exposed gun in their hand. Then again, you were referring to a "she". Can you post a pic, so I can get an idea of how nervous I'd be?

a REASONABLE man...... would not hide a rifle in his sweat shirt either. (* I believe the reference to "she" was nothing more than a method to degender-ize the fact that most recent mass murderers are men).... Anyway, nothing wrong with seeing someone walk through an area with a rifle, shot gun or anything else. As long as they don't POINT it at anyone. Soon as they do that, then they are going to be toast in my region of the world. From the tone of your posts, I take it that you're fervently anti-gun?

[spunkets]

"So, if I am understanding this correctly, you’re both somewhat agreeing that no one should be able to walk into a mall with a rifle?"

There's strip malls, then there's Malls. If the state doesn't require unloaded transport in a case, then exposed transport should be restricted to those rare strip malls where the practice is common. Otherwise a disorderly conduct charge is warranted, on the justifiable grounds folks would be extremely nervous.

"Also, for the record, there’s nothing that is stopping me from picking up my .30-30, and slinging it over my shoulder and walking down the street. With the exception that it will freak people OUT that are anti-gun, and I don’t really want to “upset” anyone. But, the truth is, I would be well within my rights and the law to do so."

Unless it's transport to and from the house/car, or to an immediate neighbor's house, it would be a disorderly. I think you have the right sense about it. You can imagine your reaction if you saw some stranger walking down the street with an exposed 30-30, away from the woods and out of season.

"Also, for the record, there’s nothing that is stopping me from picking up my .30-30, and slinging it over my shoulder and walking down the street. With the exception that it will freak people OUT that are anti-gun, and I don’t really want to “upset” anyone. But, the truth is, I would be well within my rights and the law to do so."

"However, if someone is walking around with a rifle in the OPEN, and they aren’t threatening anyone, then oh well. Nothing SHould be done."

This is a Mall were talking about here. Anyone walking around with an exposed weapon in their hand would be causing alarm and distress and they would have no jusifiable reason to do so. That includes self defense, because the very act of walking into an around a Mall with a weapon in hand is an act of provocation.

[Rick.Donaldson]

States have “rights”. They have the RIGHT to be protected from invasion and domestic violence.

You think they can take the feds to court to enforce such a right? I very much doubt it.

DOUBTING something is not the same as it not happening. States have sued the Feds on NUMEROUS occasions for many different things

Taking them to court over protection of the state from outside invasion might be a bit "timely" -- after all, if something were to happen and the Feds didn't protect them, who'd be there to sue?

The point is, certainly various states have INDEED sued the Federal government over MANY different things.

Do I think it is possible, yes, probable if the Fed doesn't uphold the Constitution, hell yes. You think it "doubtful", I think it highly probable. We have different opinions on this, and the difference is, I've seen the government at work from the inside, and I know what fops they are most of the time. LOL

There are a LOT of people who work in and for the government that are promoted solely on the "Peter Principle". But, when it comes to Constitutional rights, they are, like everyone else, severely misinformed sometimes.

[spunkets]

"a REASONABLE man...... would not hide a rifle in his sweat shirt either. "

That's correct. It's a clear sign that he's up to NG.

"Anyway, nothing wrong with seeing someone walk through an area with a rifle, shot gun or anything else."

It depends on the description of the area and the characteristics of the area are.

"From the tone of your posts, I take it that you're fervently anti-gun?"

No.

[wardaddy]

pretty girl needing an O, I’d reckon

[wardaddy]

indeed...and one of the first Civvies in the fray was a history professor who grabbed his hunting rifle

times have not changed for the better

[Rick.Donaldson]

There's strip malls, then there's Malls. If the state doesn't require unloaded transport in a case, then exposed transport should be restricted to those rare strip malls where the practice is common. Otherwise a disorderly conduct charge is warranted, on the justifiable grounds folks would be extremely nervous.



"Should be"? Is that your opinion? That ain't the case. Some cities have regulations against the "display" of weapons. Unloaded transport means "No round in the chamber". In fact, in my state and most others, you can't transport a rifle, or shot gun in your vehicle while "a round is chambered".

But, you can have a loaded weapon in your car here where I live. Rifle or otherwise. In fact, it's NOT considered a concealed weapon to have a hand gun hiding in your car anywhere in MY state. Not sure where you live? Canada perhaps?

Unless it's transport to and from the house/car, or to an immediate neighbor's house, it would be a disorderly. I think you have the right sense about it. You can imagine your reaction if you saw some stranger walking down the street with an exposed 30-30, away from the woods and out of season.

Umm no, this is not about me "having the right sense" or "transporting from my car to my house or something". I can load a rifle, walk from here around the block, down to the local convienence store and back. Not that I WOULD do this, because, golly I carry several of any type of OTHER weapons at any given time and I don't think I want to have something THAT BIG and BULKY. But guess what?

No, it's not against the law here, and it's NOT a charge of disorderly conduct EITHER. Where you're coming up with this, I don't know.

This is a Mall were talking about here. Anyone walking around with an exposed weapon in their hand would be causing alarm and distress and they would have no jusifiable reason to do so. That includes self defense, because the very act of walking into an around a Mall with a weapon in hand is an act of provocation.

let me say this.... walking around in a mall with a gun in hand, if someone has just shot twelve people is PRECISELY what *I* am going to be doing while rescuing people. I'm sorry, but you're completely out of line here. Let me tell you a story. I used to carry a rifle on the bus with me every day for nearly two years, in a large, northern city to SCHOOL. Every day. No one EVER said a word to me about it. No cops, no bus driver, no one. In fact, no one usually harassed me either!

I was on both a shooting and a drill team (I used a different rifle for drill, a non-functional one), but the one I carried to school was fully functional. I also carried ammo with me. Sometimes, I stopped in stores in the city. Sometimes I was in a soda shop getting an ice cream soda. Yes, I did of course keep it in a case, but I could easily have opened the case, took the weapon out, loaded it and killed everyone I saw.

Of course I DIDN'T. And yet, in all those years, I never shot anyone. I didn't do that until I spent time in Central America. Look, the point is, this is precisely the kind of Anti-Gun sentiment that gets people all riled up and first they ban carrying guns, next the make you get a permit (NYC, Mass., Ill. and others) finally they take away everyone's guns.

Because some kook walked into a place with a gun and killed people -- you're making a fuss over LAW ABIDING CITIZENS. You're in the wrong.

[tiger640]

“my mother and brother live in Lincoln”

.....

Two of my relatives still live in that area (not too far from the mall) and one of them works in an area hospital. Not sure if it’s one of the hospitals that received the vicitms or not. I know Westroads Mall pretty well. Absolutely HUGE!!!

[spunkets]

""Should be"? Is that your opinion? That ain't the case. Some cities have regulations against the "display" of weapons. Unloaded transport means "No round in the chamber". In fact, in my state and most others, you can't transport a rifle, or shot gun in your vehicle while "a round is chambered"."

You need better reading comprehension. Here it is again:

"If the state doesn't require unloaded transport in a case, then exposed transport should be restricted to those rare strip malls where the practice is common. Otherwise a disorderly conduct charge is warranted, on the justifiable grounds folks would be extremely nervous."

"In fact, in my state and most others, you can't transport a rifle, or shot gun in your vehicle while "a round is chambered". But, you can have a loaded weapon in your car here where I live. Rifle or otherwise."

Wonderful.

"Umm no, this is not about me "having the right sense" or "transporting from my car to my house or something". I can load a rifle, walk from here around the block, down to the local convienence store and back"

Yeah, it is. CO has disorderly statutes and if your behavior results in making people nervous, you're entitled to a disorderly. You walk into a CO mall with your 30-30 in hand, you deserve to be drawn down on, or knocked out, or killed by an unarmed person. If you drop your rifle to "defend yourself" and shoot someone drawing down on you, you'll be charged with murder and rightfully so. They in turn will explain to the judge that you posed a threat and the judge will agree.

"let me say this.... walking around in a mall with a gun in hand, if someone has just shot twelve people is PRECISELY what *I* am going to be doing while rescuing people."

You've got no sense of keeping a consistent scenario.

"Yes, I did of course keep it in a case"

Wonderful, but irrelevant. We're talking exposed, not in a case designed for a rifle, or in a box.

"You're in the wrong."

Yes, bad and totally unrepentant.

[Rocko]

Well, I wasn’t posting to you to you in the first place, I was answering somebody else’s question to me when you butted in. So don't be surprised if I consider your behavior somewhat trollish. And I don't need your permission to discuss the story in any way I see fit, including using the name "Hawkins" if I find it appropriate.

[kinghorse]

I think these news outlets are starting to feel a tiny bit dirty over the way they glorify these muderous rampages. Read the tripe over at MSNBastar.. Tracing the killing movement....lonely depressed killer had few friends...

Sickening. How bout we pass a law that allows for the perps corpse to be burned and thrown in a dump. And then a law that respects the rights of survivors with very lenient standards allowing these folks to sue the news for emotional distress.

[kinghorse]

I’m talking about the ability of families of victims of randon acts of violence, serial victims, to be able to scare others who would profit from retelling the sordid details into a sort of news blackout. This is so these criminals and the profiteers are relegated to the status of true pariah-hood.

[rikkir]

Rick, I agree with everything you’ve said. I love your story about the hikers in the woods. I can see a couple of tree huggers getting all indignant over the fact that you had your holster exposed.
Just wondering though, I am going through the CCW process here in NC, and amongst all the other rules about the places I am not allowed to carry, parades, any on premise alcohol consumption, any place that charges admission,etc. is the one that says anywhere posted as no weapons allowed. For any of these violations I believe they can pull my CCW permit. I that the way Colorado’s is written?

[Sender]

My position is that it should be normal for someone to go to the mall with a shouldered rifle or carbine. That is admittedly far from the norm and understandably would alarm the masses who would be wary of anyone who might display any sort of weapon at the mall.

Just because the status quo says that no one can have a weapon at the mall doesn't mean that we shouldn't strive to update the status quo. People carry weapons in public in Israel as a daily necessity. There are undoubtedly people in Israel who would like to stigmatize open carry of weapons, but necessity prevails, and the general public is safer as a result.

I realize that we here in America are not in the same circumstances as Israel as to terrorism, etc. However, the principles of being armed are much the same.

When you read of the occasional mall shooter, do you think he or she would rethink their scenario if good persons were armed at the mall? What is wrong with having a weapon on your shoulder or on your belt if you are a good person? Nothing. Nothing at all. Everyone should feel safer as a result.

The problem is not that certain uneducated persons feel the need to beat someone over the head with a hard object if the display a weapon in public; the problem is in educating the public that if more good people were to be armed, everyone would be safer. That's a fact.

[RandallFlagg]

I’m ahead of me game, mate.
Heh-heh!

[fivecatsandadog]

They’re pi**ed off at the world, and they want attention NOW. Taking himself to la-la land via a round to the head, and without passengers, gets no national attention. Remember, this little punk said “now I’ll be famous”. And thanks to MSM, that’s all we’ll hear about for the next week. Ugh.
I believe our great-grandfathers had the better idea. Institutionalize these a-holes, under lock and key, where they won’t bring misery to innocent people. The current system failed.

[Screaming_Gerbil]

...“Barry never articulated a reason why he did what he did.” ... “when she was arrested, she answered repeatedly I don’t know when asked why" ... "I fought with myself because I didn’t want to do any of it.” ... "When ask why he did it, he said he didn’t know." ... ”Since that day, when the boys have been asked the same question(why did they shoot), they appeared not to be able to give an answer.” ... ”Why did he do it? Andrew doesn’t know.” ... "In police interview he repeated “over and over” that “I had no choice.” ... “I have no particular reason for shooting the boys that I did. I don’t know who any of them were.” ... "Upon handing the gun over(a teacher had convinced T.J. not to kill himself—the barrel was in his mouth) he started crying hysterically and said repeatedly “I don’t know why I did this.” ... ”He said ‘I don’t know’ when asked why he did it.” ... "Williams was interrogated by detectives for about an hour after his arrest, and ... she indicated the statements may not explain why he opened fire." ... "Lonardo said the boy’s motives and intentions remain unclear even to him after sitting in on juvenile authorities’ interview of the boy after the shooting. “That’s just it,” Lonardo said. “We still don’t know.

Wow! Makes me wonder what is going on here?

[Rick.Donaldson]

You need better reading comprehension. Here it is again: "If the state doesn't require unloaded transport in a case, then exposed transport should be restricted to those rare strip malls where the practice is common. Otherwise a disorderly conduct charge is warranted, on the justifiable grounds folks would be extremely nervous."

You know, sometimes it's really frustrating to talk to someone in a chat like this when they can't even read their own writing. I said, "Should be". That's your OPINION.

Above you stated "should be restricted" -- you are making an OPINION statement here. I have perfectly fine reading comprehension and for the record, you said exactly what I thought you did. You're making a statement here that isn't FACT. You're ASSUMING it OUGHT to be like this (or it IS like this), OR you're stating this is what YOU want it to BE like.

Well, it's NOT like this, thus this is an opinion.

"In fact, in my state and most others, you can't transport a rifle, or shot gun in your vehicle while "a round is chambered". But, you can have a loaded weapon in your car here where I live. Rifle or otherwise."

Wonderful.

It IS wonderful. I'm afraid that you're trying to apply some standard you want to see to everyone else. Fortunately, that isn't happening.

Yeah, it is. CO has disorderly statutes and if your behavior results in making people nervous, you're entitled to a disorderly. You walk into a CO mall with your 30-30 in hand, you deserve to be drawn down on, or knocked out, or killed by an unarmed person. If you drop your rifle to "defend yourself" and shoot someone drawing down on you, you'll be charged with murder and rightfully so. They in turn will explain to the judge that you posed a threat and the judge will agree.



LOL. No, it IS NOT. Colorado doesn't have "disorderly statues". We have some city ordinances, and such. No, I don't deserve to be attacked if I walk into anyplace with a rifle. The fact is, as I stated before, I don't usually do that. I DO walk into a LOT of places with a weapon though. I have only had to draw my personal weapon a couple of times ever. I carry CONCEALED for a reason.

However, there are folks who DO walk around with a rifle slung over their shoulders, one guy I know of with a shot gun. It's not gotten them arrested. You're OVERREACTING.

If someone pulls a gun out on me, I'm going to shoot to kill, no matter what I am carrying, and I will be the one DEFENDING MYSELF. You have this completely backward.

Fortunately, how you'd LIKE to see things and how they really are is different. The REALITY of the situation is that I have a right to carry my weapons. Period. No you don't have a right to tell me not to "cuz your skeered". Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

I don't really understand your issue here, you're even claiming that Rudy Giuliani is a gun grabber. You're no better than he is. You're trying to LIMIT what people can carry, when, where and HOW. Sorry. You're a gun grabber in disguise.

Let's keep the "scenario constant". A kid walked into the mall with a HIDDEN RIFLE. He was up to something. If a normal person walks into the mall with a rifle NOT hidden, then it's a lot easier to see him and watch what he's doing than a kid with a hidden rifle.

You might be afraid someone might do something, but I'd be more afraid of the guy trying to get into a mall with his hidden rifle (which isn't that easy to HIDE in the first place).

For the record, *I* am not afraid to walk into a mall, even if someone is walking around with a rifle on his shoulder, visible. At least I can see him, know what to expect.

[Eaker]

What a waste of time.

Shakes head and walks away.

[Rick.Donaldson]

Thank you Sender for clarifying that. I’m going to have to agree with you. I’ve been in some of those places where people carry weapons with them everywhere, visibly, all the time. I’m sorry that some folks can’t see that, and believe that “it can’t happen here” perhaps.

Look folks, the fact that I decide to go to the mall with a “rifle slung over my shoulder” shouldn’t upset anyone. I don’t go around murdering people. No, you don’t KNOW that about me, and you don’t know jack about me at all, but guess what? So, WHAT? I don’t know anything about most of the posters here either.

What I DO Know is that all of us have a “right to keep and bear arms”, the right of the PEOPLE shall NOT be infringed. The government can NOT infringe on that right.

There are a lot of closet-anti-gun people out there. Just SEEING a gun gives them the willies. If that’s the case, then don’t look at, or handle guns. I don’t like spiders either, and I don’t think people ought to have them as pets. I dont like cantaloupe either. So perhaps I should sue to have people stop growing it.

But, people do have spiders as pets and a friend of mine that used to keep weird things like that didn’t bother me. I left his spider alone and it left me alone.

My wife LOVES cantaloupe, and I just tell her “please make sure it’s covered” after it’s cut, so the smell doesn’t get in the fridge. I don’t care if she eats it, or I see it, or I have to smell it. I just don’t eat it myself.

People who don’t like guns shouldn’t own them.

The rest of us shouldn’t be penalized because a few people are “afraid of seeing” a weapon.