Gun Legislation

[GoCubsGo]

Is it just me, but doesn't it seem that mass shootings have gone up exponentially since the assault weapons bill, I.e Brady Bill expired about ten years ago?

[Vrede too]

Seems that way, but I'd have to spend a little more time looking at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shoo ... ted_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category: ... es_by_year

This somewhat speaks to your question, though not exactly:

11 essential facts about guns and mass shootings in the United States

...

3. Active shooter events have become more common in recent years.

A report published by the FBI last year, studying active shooting situations between 2000 and 2013, found that these kinds of incidents were happening more and more recently. The first seven years of the study found an average of 6.4 active shootings per year, while the last seven years of the study found that number jumped up to 16.4 incidents per year.

Active shooting incidents are defined by federal agencies as "an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area." (This is different from mass killings, which are episodes where three or more people are killed; while many active shooting incidents wind up being mass killings, more than half of the episodes in the FBI study did not meet that definition.)



...

4. Of the 12 deadliest shootings in the United States, six have happened from 2007 onward.

...

[Vrede too]

So much for: They only attack 'gun-free' zones.

[O Really]

Yes, I've thought how sad it was that none of the police shot in Dallas were armed. If only somebody had had a gun...

[O Really]

I wonder if Dallas guy was one of those who assembled his arsenal under the Second Amendment and the theory that the Second is there for him to be able to fight the government. I wonder if those who hold that ridiculous idea ever really look at the lessons to be learned from those who try. I wonder if any of them have actually thought through their theory to its logical conclusion. They're going to do what - buy up a bunch of AR-15's and ammunition and attack...what? Or hole up somewhere like the guys in the park? Exactly how would one go about "using their Second Amendment rights" to overthrow the government? Do they really think it makes sense that a government would intentionally make it legal for citizens to overthrow it? How'd that turn out century before last? Do they think the US is some type of banana republic and they're wannabe Che's?

Fricking idiots. If Trump said instead of the Mexicans he'd deport all NRA members, even I'd vote for him. And he'd have less than half the number to round up. And maybe some of them could just be dumped with their cold dead hands around their warlike weapons. Yes, I know - not all NRA members are totally radical idiots. But they pay dues and show the decal knowing full well what the leadership is like and what they do. Ship them all off to Somalia where they can play WarLord to their heart's content.

[Vrede too]

1 man, 1 gun, 12 cops down - any questions?

Not only "fight the government", as if they stand a chance after the initial surprise against modern cops let alone the military. Some actually say that they're a deterrent against foreign attackers, claiming that they're the reason Japan and Germany did not invade. Of course, Germany essentially didn't have a surface Navy and, then or now, any invader that has somehow fought past our massive military ain't gonna care about their pitiful personal compensations. Their ammosexual wet dreams would be funny if they weren't so sad and destructive to our country.

[Vrede too]

Another important safety tip when dealing with the police - Be white.

[Seth Milner]

. . . and don't be a combatve or verbally abusive dick.

[O Really]

All good advice, for personal protection, but somewhere I missed the part of the law that says being combative or a verbally abusive dick is a death penalty offense.

[Vrede too]

He said in an article I read about the video that this is about getting home safely. It's not about one's rights or about excusing deadly police overreactions.

[Vrede too]

Oops, just realized that I meant to put the vid in the LEO thread.

[Seth Milner]

All good advice, for personal protection, but somewhere I missed the part of the law that says being combative or a verbally abusive dick is a death penalty offense.

You're correct; it's not, but the superiority mentality kicks in when the weak-minded cop is being verbally or physically abused; and that results in a rush of hormones that tends to lower the hand towards the service weapon. Seriously though, with the exception of the recent shooting in Minnesota, practically all deaths by cop started with the victim being combative or verbally abusive. Fer pete's sake, why can't people just be co-operative? Cops are human too, not perfect -- but with the same feelings and emotions as anyone else. Even the most highly trained has a breaking point.

[Seth Milner]

Oops, just realized that I meant to put the vid in the LEO thread.

That's OK. It's good for here too.

[Vrede too]

Statement On The Failure Of Our Petition To Allow Open Carry At The GOP Convention

In spite of tremendous support from over 55,000 concerned patriots across the nation, our petition to spread freedom to Cleveland and beyond has failed.

Apparently in Crooked Hitlary Clinton’s “politically correct” libtard America, some people would rather not be surrounded by high-powered semi-automatic assault weapons with high-capacity cartridges—and so the oppressive policies of Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s regime remain in place.

We at Hyperationalist will continue to fight the good fight until all Americans are free to exercise their God-given Constitutional right to carry any kind of firearm, anywhere they want, at anytime of day or night.

All snark aside, the GOP convention is days away and, very much as expected, there was no change in the policy—because any idiot knows that would it would be monumentally fucking stupid to let people to carry guns into the Quicken Loans Arena under normal circumstances, like during a basketball game or Maroon 5 concert, let alone during the 2016 Republican National Committee convention at which Donald Trump will be nominated....

We think this rule is perfectly reasonable and would very much like to see such a prohibition extended to include any and all public spaces where half-cocked assholes probably shouldn’t be carrying their penis substitutes/extensions deadly weaponry in and around our friends and families and fellow citizens (the ones who are not presidential candidates and political dignitaries).

But let’s be crystal clear about one thing: for the GOP to have used the Secret Service’s prohibition as a cop out in response to the petition is utterly laughable. How many times have congressional Republicans tried to repeal Obamacare now? Fifty times? Sixty times? Isn’t it logical that if they truly disagreed with this policy, if they genuinely held the Second Amendment so dear, they would have taken at least one shot at repealing the government tyranny represented by U.S.C. Title 18 § 3056, 1752.

If “gun-free zones” really are the unconstitutional kill zones Republicans tell us they are, this would have been a perfect time to walk the walk and show us all just how committed they are to the cause of eradicating them. Instead, on this one issue, they punted. “Aw shucks, we really would like to have guns at the convention but they said we couldn’t! Nothing we can do! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.”

Let the record show that the one time they didn’t have the gumption to fight for the Second Amendment was coincidentally the one time it involved their own safety.

So obviously the petition wasn’t a failure. It sparked a brief national conversation around the hypocrisy of the NRAGOP’s position on guns—a hypocrisy that will be on full display next week as tens of thousands of anti-gunsense Republicans pack themselves into a convention hall without the metal machines of mayhem they insist the rest of us should have around us at all times.

In other words, the same Republicans who have helped the NRA and the gun manufacturers flood our country with guns, thus contributing directly to the resulting tens of thousands of gun deaths every year, will be hiding next week behind a “gun-free zone” policy that they claim to oppose, while the rest of us get to live in fear that our child will get shot in crossfire at the playground, that a drunk and abusive husband or boyfriend will get access to a gun, that a downstairs neighbor will be playing with a gun beneath a child’s bedroom, that we’ll be in the wrong place at the wrong time when an argument escalates at the grocery store, that a suicidal teenager will get his or her hands on a gun, that a heroic police officer will find himself targeted by a lunatic with a long gun, that a three-year old will find a gun and shoot himself in the face, and so on…

To this end, Hyperationalist will be monitoring the number and circumstances of gun deaths that occur all across the country between the opening and closing gavels of the convention. We will post a running tally, updated daily, of the roughly 400 Americans who are likely to die by gun while The Grand Old Party is safely tucked away in the gun-free Quicken Loans Arena.

... “Sure, everyone should be able to carry guns around, but just not here, please.”

Why, Mr. Loomis (president of the Cleveland Police Patrolmen’s Association)? Why not there specifically? And if not there, why anywhere else?

[Vrede too]

The Castle Doctrine (also known as a castle law or a defense of habitation law) is a legal doctrine that designates a person's abode or any legally occupied place – e.g., a vehicle or workplace, as a place in which that person has protections and immunities permitting him or her, in certain circumstances, to use force (up to and including deadly force) to defend himself or herself against an intruder, free from legal prosecution for the consequences of the force used.

If the MN cop that murdered Philando escapes punishment, we can call it the Castile Doctrine:

The legal doctrine that designates any locale as a place in which a cop has protections and immunities permitting him or her, in any "I was afraid" circumstance, to use force (up to and including deadly force) to kill an innocent civilian, free from legal prosecution for the consequences of the force used.

[O Really]

So when is some national media going to have the nerve to point out that the people shooting cops are living the NRA narrative on why "we" must protect "out" gun rights. The NRA (and other idiots) say the NRA isn't to protect hunters, but to make sure we defend ourselves against the government. What is there about shooting cops in response to their heavy-handed government-protected treatment of citizens (including at least one who was a legal concealed carry permit holder and followed proper procedure in reporting his firearm to the cop who stopped - then shot - him) that is not in keeping with NRA mantra? Oppressive government? Yep. Armed resistance? Sure. Oh wait. The ones with guns were black guys. Nevermind.

[Vrede too]

It's not terrorism or wannabe terrorism if the perp is a white (often Christian) con.

[GoCubsGo]

Wow, go directly past go, do not collect $200 and go directly to the Supreme Court. Another BIG reason to be against Trumpf.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/201 ... story.html

[Seth Milner]

It's not terrorism or wannabe terrorism if the perp is a white (often Christian) con.

Or jealous.

[O Really]

At-Will Doesn't Let Employers Fire Legal Gun Owners: 5th Circ.

Law360, Washington (August 9, 2016, 12:19 PM ET) -- The Fifth Circuit widened exceptions to liability for states with at-will employment Monday, allowing a Mississippi man to sue his employer for firing him for legally storing a gun in his car on company property.

Monday’s published decision added to a public policy exception already existing in Mississippi’s at-will employment law, where employers could be held liable for firing employees who refused to participate in illegal acts in the McArn v. Allied Bruce-Terminix Co. case. Now the Fifth Circuit added to that list employees who legally store guns in their vehicles under a separate Mississippi law.

“The court for the first time recognized a statutory exception to the employment-at-will doctrine that is equivalent to the public policy exceptions identified in McArn v. Allied Bruce-Terminix Co,” the decision said.

The decision allows Robert Swindol’s suit against former employer Aurora Flight Sciences Corp. to move forward, after Swindol alleged both wrongful termination and defamation tied to his dismissal from a job at the company’s Columbus, Mississippi, location.

Management at the company fired Swindol when it learned that he had a firearm in his locked truck parked on company property in violation of company policy, according to the decision, and at a later staff meeting a human resources manager referred to him as a “security risk” and encouraged employees to call 911 if they saw him.

Swindol brought claims for wrongful discharge and defamation based on both the firing and later statements at a meeting. The federal district court dismissed the suit because the Mississippi statute Swindol sued under, Section 45-9-55, provides a release for liability to employers for damages caused by employees’ firearms on company property, but does not create any exceptions to the general at-will employment statute.

The Fifth Circuit reversed that decision, based on a certified question to Mississippi’s Supreme Court, and said that the Mississippi law also creates an exception for liability tied to dismissals for legally following the statute.

“Swindol alleges he was terminated when Aurora enforced a legally impermissible firearms policy against him, and he seeks damages,” the decision said. “Based on the Mississippi court’s response, we conclude that Swindol has stated a claim for wrongful discharge under Mississippi law.”

Separately, the decision also affirmed the dismissal of Swindol’s defamation claim. Below, the defamation claim had been dismissed without prejudice for failing to plead that the statements the human resources manager made or impliedly made were false.

Fifth Circuit Judges Leslie H. Southwick, Jacques L. Weiner and Edith Brown Clement participated in the decision. Judge Southwick wrote the opinion.

Counsel for Swindol and Aurora could not be immediately reached for comment Tuesday.

Swindol is represented by David O. Butts.

Aurora is represented by Stephen William Robinson, Robert Bradley Best and Nicholas DelVecchio SanFilippo.

The case is Robert Swindol v. Aurora Flight Sciences Corp., case number is 14-60779, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.