Posted on 12/06/2007 7:02:50 AM PST by CometBaby
No no. He was a good boy who was just beginning to turn his life around.
We are having a debate in Virginia because we don’t want to be quick to label mentally ill people as “dangerous” just because of these types of shootings. But we DO want to be quick to label them so they can’t buy a firearm. What to do? How do you label them without labeling them
>>In FL, you can laugh at the “NO GUNS” signs and walk on past. They aren’t enforceable at all.<<
>>Except maybe an US post offices where there are metal detectors.<<
No guns in the Post Office. Ever. Federal offense.
It didn’t used to happen until the liberals and communists took over.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PROHIBITING HANDGUNS IN A BUSINESS OR OTHER ENTITY
In order to provide notice that entry on property by a license holder with a concealed handgun is forbidden, Penal Code Section 30.06(c)(3)(A) requires that a written communication contain the following language:
"PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.06, PENAL CODE (TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF A LICENSE TO CARRY A CONCEALED HANDGUN) A PERSON LICENSED UNDER SUBCHAPTER H, CHAPTER 411, GOVERNMENT CODE (CONCEALED HANDGUN LAW), MAY NOT ENTER THIS PROPERTY WITH A CONCEALED HANDGUN.""CONFORME A LA SECCIÓN 30.06 DEL CÔDIGO PENAL (TRASPASAR PORTANDO ARMAS DE FUEGO) PERSONAS CON LICENCIA BAJO DEL SUB-CAPITULO H, CAPITULO 411, CODIGO DE GOBIERNO (LEY DE PORTAR ARMAS), NO DEBEN ENTRAR A ESTA PROPIEDAD PORTANDO UN ARMA DE FUEGO."
Penal Code Section 30.06(c)(3)(B) further states that a sign must meet the following requirements: includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish; appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That is a BIG sign (about 18" X 24")-- and very few places (mostly banks and hospitals) display them.
“I noticed Fox had the shooter’s picture on their chiron this morning.”
Dr Bennett noted in his show he would not use the guys name as he was looking to be famous. I liked Dr. B’s approach.
I, too, am in Omaha.
It was obvious this kid (and even if he was 19, he was still a kid in my eyes as he had never grown up emotionally) had planned this for a while. He timed this with the President’s visit, knowing most law enforcement would be away from the store. He had previously scouted the store, as he knew right where to go to have the best vantage point for ‘sniping’ of all the malls in Omaha (Van Maur has a big open area, with a nice railing around the third floor where one can brace a gun...no other store has as good of view in any of the malls in town)
All the warning signs were there of the kid about to go off, like the original poster stated. This is a tragedy that could have been stopped by those who knew the kid.
And, of course, CNN immediately trots out things like ‘mall security’, and ‘are you safe in a mall’ instead of looking at the real cause of the problem: clueless idiots not paying attention to signs right in front of them.
To the poster that said an SKS is not an assault rifle: sorry, yes it is. It may be only single shot, but it is a variant of a fully automatic gun. Though it might be used by some for hunting, it is not what this area calls a hunting rifle by any means. This SKS, according to witnesses, was also firing 3 round bursts. This means it was modified back to its assault rifle roots.
I am very much a supporter of the 2nd Amendment, but the weapon the kid was carrying is exactly the weapon banned by the assault weapon law. That brings up the question on how someone mentally instable like he was could get a hold of one of these weapons. Rumor was he stole it from his step father. But this also means none of those assault weapon provisions in law would have prevented this, thus proving how useless they are. A psychopath can get a hold of one of these weapons, yet law abiding citizens cannot defend themselves and thus end up becoming victims. One person with a pistol to defend themselves could have prevented 8 other deaths, but you won’t hear that on the liberal media.
“Section 30.06”
Snork!
i’d put any handgun i own (except my bearcat) against a punk kid with an SKS.
Perhaps the need a sign that says:
NOTICE:
IT IS ILLEGAL TO ROB BANKS!
“That is a BIG sign (about 18” X 24”)— and very few places (mostly banks and hospitals) display them.”
I’ve seen smaller signs in Dallas. Interesting that they don’t meet the legal requirement.
CBS said it was an SKS. But the graphic of the rifle they used looked like a 30-30 lever action. To an uneducated non - gun owner anything with a long barrell could be an assult rifle.
An SKS is a poor choice for an assult rifle. They won’t even knock down a deer at close range.
I heard on one the the cable news stations he was going to go hunting with her sons ...if it wasn’t his gun & one of her sons were allowing him to use it are they in any trouble?
“Your point is valid for all churches.”
There’s plenty of churches in the heartland where members of the congregation carry on Sunday mornings.
I was thinking more of along the lines of the “enlightened” homosexual leadership supporting protestant churches, as well as Unitarian and Quaker churches in the suburbs.
“marginal” for deer hunting?
I noticed that...........It’s okay for them, obviously........
HEY...I LIKE your SIGN!!!!! But, maybe, it should say....”Bad guys with guns will be shot”
“To the poster that said an SKS is not an assault rifle: sorry, yes it is. It may be only single shot, but it is a variant of a fully automatic gun.”
No, it’s not. The SKS is not a variant of anything. It was a semi-auto from day 1, and NEVER fully automatic by design.
If a person is too dangerous to be allowed to own a gun, he is too dangerous to be allowed to drive a car. It’s too easy to drive into a crowd of people. Imagine a guy in a large SUV running through the barracade at a local christmas parade, and just flying down the sidewalk. There’d be hundreds of dead people, because they are all packed in and there’s no place to run to.
If I had a choice between an insane person with a handgun, and an insane person with a large vehicle, I’d take the handgun, because you can always try to tackle the guy and wrestle the gun away. Ever try to wrestle an SUV to the ground?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.