At least there were witnesses so nobody's moaning about The Big Bad Policeman shoot the Man Who Didn't Deserve To Die Over This.

Glad to hear that the victims will survive.

The difference between being trained properly to use a hand gun is the victims will live, and the gunman is dead.

Or, they'd all be dead.

a good guy with a gun takes out a bad guy with a gun. God bless the victims

Creek Dog: well, it's not necessarily a training issue. Someone with a shotgun (where ammo scatters) or a high-powered assault rifle can do a lot more damage than someone with a handgun that must be more precisely aimed.

GM Creek.

I'll just say well done officer and avoid the whole gun control issue since it's inevitable that this article will descend into orgy of witty one-liners, smartass jokes and quotes from 250 year old dead men. Most likely including a heavy dash of paranoia, what if scenarios, and apocalyptic rhetoric.

Creek Dog - like you, glad to hear the victim will survive.

But you can't be serious in your post of that's the difference in training - do you mean to tell me someone trained never misses? You and I both know that isn't true.

It turned out really well, thank goodness they got the guy. Glad it wasn't a repeat of the 8 bystanders shot by the trained NY cops in front of the Empire State Building. I guess that's why when NY passed their huge gun law, even cops weren't allowed to take weapons in certain places...oops.

Kudos to NBC for covering the only shooting that occurred in the US last night. When news breaks, they fix it.

Marc - Those "petty" comments are because the evil world you mention is at our doorsteps, and you want to take our best form of defense (shroud it in talks of a ban on assault weapons, but it won't stop there). That is why we gun owners get so frustrated with people who are afraid of guns and who also feel getting rid of them will make us all safer. Being better people will make us safer, not attempting to control every aspect of peoples' lives.

G'moron' Chris...

sleepinsadie,

Let me reiterate and break down what I wrote to better help you understand my post and no, not never misses but, as you can see, they did their job that they were trained to do... The difference between being trained properly to use a hand gun is the victims are going to live, and the gunman is dead.

The difference between being trained properly to use a hand gun is the victims will live, and the gunman is dead.

Or, they'd all be dead.

Breaking down my first sentence; The gunman most probably had no handgun training whatsoever and tried to "unsuccessfully" kill two "defenseless" people at just about point blank range. He shot them both "BUT" they both survived. The police are highly trained (shoot to kill) and could not get point blank with the gunman but were able to kill him. Correct?

Breaking down my second sentence; If the gunman was highly trained as the police are, the gunman would have had a better chance to kill the two victims along with the cops killing him so,

they'd all be dead.

Any questions?

What Joeybagofdonuts said. Good post...

gm CD..

Now that the attack to ban assault rifles appears to have been so successful, Commissioner Kelly of New York has begun to lay the groundwork for handguns.

Handguns account for nearly all murders by firearm in New York City and state, data show. An analysis by the NYPD determined that assault weapons were used in just three of the 1,400 instances of gunplay in the city last year.

“For us in New York City, and I believe in most urban centers throughout America, the problem really is concealable handguns,” Kelly said

I think it’s all propaganda cooked up by the current administration furthering their agenda....

I never happened and these aren't the droids you are looking for.

Glad it wasn't a repeat of the 8 bystanders shot by the trained NY cops in front of the Empire State Building. I guess that's why when NY passed their huge gun law, even cops weren't allowed to take weapons in certain places...oops

There are places in hopefully every state where you cannot take firearms. Forever thankful they are not allowed in my work building or I would be sitting around a bunch of armed individuals. Especially when I have co-workers who salivate over Guns and Ammo (which they can bring in) like it was Playboy. Some kind of bizarre eroticism involving these inanimate objects appears to be involved for some. Just part of the sickness.

That incident in NY illustrates that more guns are not the solution. In no way should it be used for a pro-gun argument.

"Now that the attack to ban assault rifles appears to have been so successful, Commissioner Kelly of New York has begun to lay the groundwork for handguns."

Yep, today the assault rifles and and large mags, tomorrow just plain rifles and shotguns, and soon after that, the handguns.

If they just would've had one of those "Gun Free Zone" signs, this whole thing could've been avoided. I don't know who failed to put up said sign (the bar owner, maybe?), but someone needs to go to jail over it.

GM Creek.

I'll just say well done officer and avoid the whole gun control issue since it's inevitable that this article will descend into orgy of witty one-liners, smartass jokes and quotes from 250 year old dead men. Most likely including a heavy dash of paranoia, what if scenarios, and apocalyptic rhetoric.

I'll just say well done officer too and avoid the whole gun control issue since it's inevitable that this article will descend into an orgy of witty one-liners about evil guns, smartass jokes about how a gun free society is a pleasant and blissful one and quotes from 30 year old liberal thinker-feelers who believe a knee jerk emotional reaction infused into a political decision is ALWAYS the best one. Most likely inculding a heavy dash of perpetual Obama is my god diatribe, what he says is definitely the best for this country without any scruitiny or oversight needed and the government always looks out for its people through legislation rather than itself.

The "soup du jour" is now readily apparent and MSNBC has revealed itself ... now, it appears that EVERY SINGLE death from a handgun incident will receive national attention .... and a story reporting what happened !

It kind of reminds me when Bush was President and every day MSDNC would give a DAILY update on the death count ... the total lives lost in war !! Of course, after Bush was out of office and Barack Hussein Obama became President, the rolling "death counts" magically disappeared !!! LOL !!!!

But then again, the "LEAN FORWARD" is merely MSDNC/NBC spreading the propaganda of the extreme leftist agenda anyway ! Funny how NBC has "sold" itself and no longer tries to hide their total lack of objectivity !

Most of you talk like a man with a paper ass!! and this ole former Marine small arms instuctor has had it with you people ---Just how many of you have ever held a 45 in your weak hands and fired at a stationary target or even a moving targetand hit what you looking ateven @ 20 yards-Try iit before shooting your mouth off and see how silly you are!!!!!

@Creekdog...

I have to disagree with you on this one... normally I do in other comments... I use to run pistol / plate matches open to the public... MANY police officers show up too from various surrounding towns. Many of times they left packing up early because of most other private citizens will out shoot them time after time. Speaking with some, they tell me of some perfectly placed rounds in the lockers at the local police stations. We also have our range open to training of police as they do not have their own range in town. It's good for a laugh sometimes.. so I can tell you first hand that the gun owners I know can outshoot some police.. Myself included..

Standupjokeoff,

well, it's not necessarily a training issue. Someone with a shotgun (where ammo scatters) or a high-powered assault rifle can do a lot more damage than someone with a handgun that must be more precisely aimed.

Judging by this statement I will assume you have never handled or fired an assault rifle before. If you had fired one before you would know that you would require the same amount of aim with an assault rifle as you do with a handgun. Besides, at a close range the rounds from a .45 or .40 would do more damage to internal organs than the .223 or 7.62 rounds.

@ Huevos

Hopfully they shot his gun too. That evil little thing...

#1

No, this story doesn't mention it, but the gun was taken into custody for outstanding warrants from an unrelated incidence.

Actually it sounds like suicide by cop, and this loser was too much the coward to turn the gun on himself.

@ Chris from Yucaipa

GM Creek.

I'll just say well done officer and avoid the whole gun control issue since it's inevitable that this article will descend into orgy of witty one-liners, smartass jokes and quotes from 250 year old dead men. Most likely including a heavy dash of paranoia, what if scenarios, and apocalyptic rhetoric.

#1.6

Nothing wrong with witty one-liners, as long as they are witty, (most are just vitriol) or smart ass comments (hopefully designed to keep people on their toes).

And just exactly is wrong with quoting the people who founded this country, and set the foundation for it to become what it was, The Greatest Nation on the face of the planet. (Even as bad as it was for some, they knew they would be worse off any where else, which is why they did not leave. Compare that to the Great Socialist nations, and how many people risked prison or death to escape? {notice I said escape}

Or do you think they are some how passe', obsolete? No longer relevant?

Question me Chris:

Up until 1934, any one in the US could order and have shipped through the USPS, a fully automatic sub-machine(Tommy Gun) or even a BAR. Where were all the spree shootings then(other than criminal gangland)? It was not uncommon to walk into a local hardware store and buy a case of Dynamite to remove tree stumps. If easy access to deadly weapons is the measure of a deadly society, why were things like the "Bath School Disaster" not regular occurrences?

This is not an apocalyptic rhetoric, no hypothetical scenario, no paranoia, not a quote from 250 year old dead men. Just a page out of history.

Creek Dog--

Without any formal training I went to an IDPA match and outshot several police officers and finished in the middle of the pack.

I suspect the unsuccessful killing of his 2 victims might have as much to do with caliber selection as training--- although we don't know what he shot them with... if it was a little .25 caliber or .380 that might explain the failure. Those little pocket pistols are both hard to control (for aim) and underpowered (for lack of a better word).

Joseph Mancuso-1626109: Most of you talk like a man with a paper ass!! and this ole former Marine small arms instuctor has had it with you people ---Just how many of you have ever held a 45 in your weak hands and fired at a stationary target or even a moving targetand hit what you looking ateven @ 20 yards-Try iit before shooting your mouth off and see how silly you are!!!!!

I have... and yes it has a kick, but it's not that impossible to hit a moving target at 20 yards...

I prefer the 9mm... it's easier to handle and keep on target. Makes the 50 meter target a cinch.

Why did this article mention how many facebook likes the Twilight Exit has?

anyone else find that REALLY weird?

Also - maybe the guy was just a poor shooter, but this sounds a lot more like a Suicide by Cop.

Finally, I think I completely understand why nations like NORTH KOREA want nukes, marc put it best:

Marc - "Those "petty" comments are because the evil world you mention is at our doorsteps, and you want to take our best form of defense (shroud it in talks of a ban on assault weapons, but it won't stop there)."

we've already attempted to invade and take over North Korea, so it's not like they are merely paranoid. they've been broken into and beaten down, and robbed (as they see it, we broke NK in two, so we have robbed them of a complete nation).

so we are continually, via South Korea, at North Korea's door steps...and in recent times have proven that we will invade and occupy nations that do not have nukes (Iraq and Afghanistan) while also proving that we will do nothing but TALK TOUGH to nations what have nukes, like Iran...and North Korea.

So, given your logic on why individuals in America should have guns - it makes sense to me why North Korea should have nukes.

Of course, we reason why they shouldnt because they are "crazy"...but they are no more crazy than paranoid gun nuts who fear every moving thing is about to shoot them, hence the need for a gun. They are no more crazy than gun nuts who believe the world is about to end and they need to doomsday prep - and they are still allowed to have guns. They are no more crazy than gun nuts who believe liberals are trying to and going to take their guns, and therefore the only solution is a civil war.

We allow gun nuts to have guns because they arent "crazy" in that OTHER kind of certifiable way, no we say THEIR kind of crazy is LOGICAL crazy because there are robbers, rapists, thieves, jerks who WILL shoot and kill them for THINGS.

But North Korea knows that we'd just as quickly invade, occupy and destroy North Korea as it currently exists to "bring them democracy"...aka "make them do as we say".

So, their fear is just as justified as an american gun nuts fears are justified.

I say, give Americans Guns and give North Korea Nukes!

@ voxrationis

Glad it wasn't a repeat of the 8 bystanders shot by the trained NY cops in front of the Empire State Building. I guess that's why when NY passed their huge gun law, even cops weren't allowed to take weapons in certain places...oops

There are places in hopefully every state where you cannot take firearms. Forever thankful they are not allowed in my work building or I would be sitting around a bunch of armed individuals. Especially when I have co-workers who salivate over Guns and Ammo (which they can bring in) like it was Playboy. Some kind of bizarre eroticism involving these inanimate objects appears to be involved for some. Just part of the sickness.

That incident in NY illustrates that more guns are not the solution. In no way should it be used for a pro-gun argument.

#1.14

Yep, more guns are not the solution, that is why there are so many shootings, gun fights, etc at gun shows and target ranges. And I keep reading all the stories about disgruntled employees killing several ex-coworkers at places where guns are readily handy.

Funny thing is, if you weren't so myopic, maybe you would see that if your co-workers allowed to carry, you would safer than you would be at home.

Studies also show there is a lower incidence of crime among CCP holder than the general public, and in some case even police officers.

Remember cops are people, and they are not any different than you or I and they are subject to the same problems. And until some one starts shooting at you, you don't know how you will react, no matter what the training, Soldier, Cop, civilian, don't matter.

So to differentiate between cops and civilians is a non-sequitor.

w.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/12/foghorn/ny-times-uses-deceptive-statistics-to-promote-anti-gun-agenda-again/

Firearms in private hands routinely save more lives than they take. Law-abiding gun owners commit crime at lower rates than the general population, and when they are forced to shoot someone in self-defense, their error rate is lower than that of police officers. These are statistical facts, borne out by the work of men like Gary Kleck, John Lott, and the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action.

Jessica-1170252

Why did this article mention how many facebook likes the Twilight Exit has?

anyone else find that REALLY weird?

Also - maybe the guy was just a poor shooter, but this sounds a lot more like a Suicide by Cop.

Finally, I think I completely understand why nations like NORTH KOREA want nukes, marc put it best:

Marc - "Those "petty" comments are because the evil world you mention is at our doorsteps, and you want to take our best form of defense (shroud it in talks of a ban on assault weapons, but it won't stop there)."

we've already attempted to invade and take over North Korea, so it's not like they are merely paranoid. they've been broken into and beaten down, and robbed (as they see it, we broke NK in two, so we have robbed them of a complete nation).

so we are continually, via South Korea, at North Korea's door steps...and in recent times have proven that we will invade and occupy nations that do not have nukes (Iraq and Afghanistan) while also proving that we will do nothing but TALK TOUGH to nations what have nukes, like Iran...and North Korea.

So, given your logic on why individuals in America should have guns - it makes sense to me why North Korea should have nukes.

Of course, we reason why they shouldnt because they are "crazy"...but they are no more crazy than paranoid gun nuts who fear every moving thing is about to shoot them, hence the need for a gun. They are no more crazy than gun nuts who believe the world is about to end and they need to doomsday prep - and they are still allowed to have guns. They are no more crazy than gun nuts who believe liberals are trying to and going to take their guns, and therefore the only solution is a civil war.

We allow gun nuts to have guns because they arent "crazy" in that OTHER kind of certifiable way, no we say THEIR kind of crazy is LOGICAL crazy because there are robbers, rapists, thieves, jerks who WILL shoot and kill them for THINGS.

But North Korea knows that we'd just as quickly invade, occupy and destroy North Korea as it currently exists to "bring them democracy"...aka "make them do as we say".

So, their fear is just as justified as an american gun nuts fears are justified.

I say, give Americans Guns and give North Korea Nukes!

#1.25

Evidently you don't know your history. WE, did not divide Korea, that was a post WWII compromise forced by the then Soviet Union. It was the communists who violated the treaty when they invaded the south in 1950. So who is the aggressor? And when we "invaded" North Korea, was that not in retaliation for them invading the south? And who raped and plundered first? (Not that I read about the Allies doing much if any raping and pillaging, although I am sure it did happen some)

But my guess is you are one of those dope smoking hippy liberal commies, who believe the revisionist history that all the worlds ills are the responsibility of the white imperialist capitalists. And if we could just create a one world Communist Government we could all live like it is Valhalla.

It is too bad stupid has no limits. It would be nice if there was a sign somewhere along the way that said "Don't go beyond this point" not that it would do you any good. You'd just keep blindly plowing 'forward' totally unaware of the consequences.

Too bad the shooter didn't bring an AR-15 or AK47 assault weapon. He would've been far more efficient and effective in his quest to exercise his 2nd amendment right to bear arms. Just a pussy little pistol... what a dweeb! Hey you angry boyfriends and ex-husbands out there: be a MAN like Chuck Norris or Ted Nugent and do the job right! Learn something from Aurora and Newtown! Those guys a heroes!

A good man with a gun stopped a bad man with a gun.

That's surely gotta stick in some liberals' craws!

Now, back to banning assault weapons!!!one!!

fascisthater

Too bad the shooter didn't bring an AR-15 or AK47 assault weapon. He would've been far more efficient and effective in his quest to exercise his 2nd amendment right to bear arms. Just a pussy little pistol... what a dweeb! Hey you angry boyfriends and ex-husbands out there: be a MAN like Chuck Norris or Ted Nugent and do the job right! Learn something from Aurora and Newtown! Those guys a heroes!

#1.28

Do you even know what a Fascist is? Do you know what a hypocrite is?

The answer to a bad guy with a gun is a cop with a gun!

facisthater: Whatever side you're on, we don't want you.

Some of us are afraid of people. Some of us are afraid of people with guns.

When we all have guns, we can all be afraid of all people with guns.

Have at it...

For those that say they don't want to ban guns completely, I call B.S.

You can go on YouTube & watch Feinstein in a 1995 interview, with Dianne Sawyer (I believe), where Feinstein says & I quote:

If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban picking up everyone of them, Mr. & Mrs. America turn them all in, I would have done it. I could not do that, the votes weren't here.

(just type in - feinstein gun ban 1995 - in the search box on YouTube)

So there you go. It's not about sensible gun control. If this old train wreck had her way she would have government goon squads kicking in doors to confiscate them, if they weren't turned in voluntarily, no doubt.

A complete ban is the ultimate goal of these gun grabbing, power hungry, egotistical, control freak, scum, who think they know how to run your life better than you do, when it comes to all topics under the sun.

It disappoints people like Feinstein that they can't do a complete gun ban all at once. So instead they try to take small steps & chip away at the 2nd Amendment until nothing will be left. But I have confidence that gun owners in this country won't let that happen.

Oh btw, cops aren't under any obligation to protect anyone.

"...fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen." -- SCOTUS, Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App.181)

One,

You're good. ;-) LOL

American Gun Deaths to Exceed Traffic Fatalities by 2015.

"About 85 Americans are shot dead daily -- 53 of them suicides. Every day, one of those killed by firearms is 14 or younger."

Note that I come from a military background and a hunting family, so I'm not for or against gun control with this post... just stating a fact, folks. Or in other words, "Houston, we have a problem." Time to face up to it.

OK, 85-53=32 and out of the 32 how many are thug crimes?

How many are LEO's popping thugs?

There is violence everywhere everyday,It seems an Agenda and a picking and choosing what shootings MSNBC will put out,If they started reporting the rape and murders with other Assault weapons ; as in knives bats ect,We might say we have a rape and murder problem which equals a criminal problem,and we need to lock them up throw away the keys, murders,pedifile's and Rapests should be delt with swiftly and harshly,then maybe crime rates will go down,but the everyday pick and choose agenda stories are old and tired bombardment of gun stories.

Yes it is sad that people become so desperate that they take their own lives.. Regardless of the way they accomplish the suicide the root causes are still there.. Stress from a bad economy, sexual drive and social interaction relations with others are high on my list of causes.. People driving themselves or the entire family into a lake or tree or an oncoming car happen all the time but many auto accidents are not investigated that way and these suicides slip through the cracks so I would think the number is higher.. The bad economy is a proven mechanism for despair and as this increases so will the crime and violence at all levels..

When the issues become political the stress is happily shoveled out for profit and ratings by the media.. Things like abortion, religion, race and the firearms ownership ban vs the Constitution can cause people to go over the edge.. Unlike the rash of bombings and shootings at abortion clinics no pro firearms folks went gun happy.. My wife could not believe that all firearm owners were being painted as such sick child killing perverts because so many are your neighbor, the minister at your church, the auto mechanic, entertainers, politicians and the list goes on and on.. What has become of our society that agendas are pushed with such nonsense and people blindly follow?? Politicians push agendas and ignore all the other things that do not fit into their mould.. Exactly Ster2 they are acting like celebrities looking for fame at any cost..

I don't understand why suicides should count in the gun deaths. Unless they killed someone else beforehand of course.

Good job by the cops.

Sounds like the shooter must have used a pistol. I'm sure that MSNBC would have announced it if he'd used a rifle of any form.

Truth, it's the liberal media that is trying to brainwash the average American regarding guns and the people who use them. Less that 3% of gun death are by the so called "Assault" weapons, but those are the ones the press and the government are focusing on.

They're counted because they used a gun to kill themselves, not so hard to understand.

So, do they run a "suicide by pill" count as well?

Yeah, even Joe "Effin" Biden admitted "assault weapons" were very seldom used in a crime. More people are killed with Glocks...or Fords.

Janine There is no doubt the gun issue has become a political witch hunt led by narrow minded politicians like Feinstein who carries a gun, Obama who has hundreds of guns protecting him and Biden.. Since they are realizing that their agenda is not flying even though they ran the full court media press they have started to backpedaled to save their own political skins.. Or Obama is using a diverting tactic to divide and conquer the public.. This is exactly like the Florida shooting death of Trayvon Martin where an incident is hyped up to a point of near riots by the White House media machine.. Putting Federal assets into play for a state level issue and dragging race into the media $hit shoveling was pure political grandstanding.. What was his agenda on that?? Creating racial division and a slide downhill in our society??

We thank the officer for saving tax dollars from a trial and prison term.. But in the same thoughts I feel sad that the man was not given a chance to be rehabilitated and helped with the mental hopelessness or illness he most likely had.. If the politicians don't stop burning money soon it will get worse.. They are afraid of us and should be since their leadership over the last 100 years or so has had far too many flaws..

Rick This is true but the fact that it was not violence directed toward others is important.. It just adds to the misleading affect the media is pushing..

Exactly Roadrunner, no one else was targeted by the person committing suicide, but I'm not sure I agree with you about his "alleged" mental illness that created this situation.

Not everyone who murders another is necessarily mentally ill. At least not in the manner that the liberal media would like us to believe.

He shot his ex-girlfriend. Seems to me that could be the issue right there. That he was pissed off over the breakup for whatever reason. That doesn't necessarily make him mentally ill. The information here is very sketchy. There's no info regarding his background. Whether he had violent tendencies, a police record, etc.

StandUpJokeOff

American Gun Deaths to Exceed Traffic Fatalities by 2015.

"About 85 Americans are shot dead daily -- 53 of them suicides. Every day, one of those killed by firearms is 14 or younger."

Note that I come from a military background and a hunting family, so I'm not for or against gun control with this post... just stating a fact, folks. Or in other words, "Houston, we have a problem." Time to face up to

Just did a fact check and more then 5/8 of these are suicides, gun accidents by owner, law enforcement shootings and gang hits. Nice try pal. Think of some other b.s. stats.

Note that I come from a military background and Im FOR gun freedoms because no matter how you stack your stats, the law abiding citizens legally owning firearms rarely even factor into them.

Janine Please note that when I said mental hopelessness or illness the hopeless feeling could have stemmed from a broken relationship.. I did not want to assume he was just a violent person who was already a type Z personality his whole life.. Although we have far too many of those wife/girlfriend/bar fight types in our society as well..

Why stop at banning guns to prevent suicides? Ban rope too.

Sheesh.... if you Libs had lived in the time of David and Goliath yall'd be hollering for our slingshots.

lorakittle: It's almost becoming a normal occurrence. Seems at least 1 person dies here by gun violence on a daily basis. Looks to me that he was hoping he killed his ex and then committed suicide by cop. Don't know what the answer is, if there even is an answer.

Give him a stiff drink and a set of car keys... statistically much more effective.

#2.10 riley-1759556: Just did a fact check and more then 5/8 of these are suicides, gun accidents by owner, law enforcement shootings and gang hits. Nice try pal. Think of some other b.s. stats.

StandUp's stats are right on (and I believe he already acknowledged that 5/8 of the deaths were suicides). According to the CDC in 2010 there were 31,672 total firearm deaths in the US. That comes to an average of 86.8 deaths per day.

19,392 (61%) were suicides

11,078 (35%) were homicides

344 (1%) were legal intervention

606 (2%) were unintentional

252 (0.8%) were undetermined intent

These numbers are virtually identical to what he put up, even accounting for the accidents and LE shootings. Hardly what I would call BS stats.

Why are they counting gang bangers killing each other. That should be encouraged, their doing society a favor.

roadrunner: This thread is actually about a bar shooting in Seattle - not a "I hate the President more than you do" forum.

janine: "Not everyone who murders another is necessarily mentally ill. At least not in the manner that the liberal media would like us to believe." What 'manner' is that?

I've noticed that the 'run down the libs' posts outnumber the 'run down the con's' posts by about 20 to 1. Wonder why that is? Few questions, just rants.

Have asked numerous posters to quote the English Dictionary definition of 'liberal'. Not one has been able to bring themselves to do it. Not surprised.

Fine SDN:

Liberal - See "Progressive"

Progressive - See "Socialist"

Socialist - See "Communist"

According to the FBI Uniform Crime report for 2011:

12,664 murders in the U.S.

Out of the total above 8,583 were murders by firearms, broken down as follows:

6,220 committed by handguns

323 committed by rifles

356 committed by shotguns

1,684 committed by unknown type of firearms

1,694 committed by knives or cutting instruments

1,659 committed by other weapons

728 committed by hands/fists/feet etc..

Out of 315 million people in the U.S. means your odds of getting murdered by a firearm is a small fraction of 1%. The odds are even smaller if you only consider murders committed with rifles.

While stats aren't any comfort to the family/friends of victims killed by guns the fact is you have a greater chance of getting struck by lightening than getting murdered by a firearm.

I don't know about anyone else but I'm willing to live with that minuscule risk in order to preserve one of our basic constitutional freedoms in this country.

I think I uttered his masters name in vain..

Since I am intelligently discussing the social impacts that drive violent crime and you can just muster complaints about your socialist masters perception, fool.. You may have issues that are unresolvable just like the rest of the liberal zealots..

Live by the Hoe......

Live by the dimbulb.

Live by the Dictator......

You're all crazy.

I live by bacon, and dammit, I'll die by it, too...

You keep spewing the same sh*t every time there is an article like this, and you have no argument or facts to back up why it will work. Your one-liners mean nothing. I have a better one-liner: We need idiot control in the USA.

Takenaka is just a troll trying to provoke traffic..........

SSDD.........

BUT a great cartoon character in Asian comics!

Strong as a mule and damned near as smart!

I am starting to believe takenaka is secretly pro-gun and just says crap to get pro-gun responses. Nobody is that dumb. Oh wait, I forgot what site we are at.

I believe Tacky the troll is a wanker and hose-bag.

Takenaka is correct. It is too easy to get a gun for a man who wants to shoot a women at a bar. It didn't help the man with the gun either. He died. We would all be safer with better, stricter gun control.

Duh, was it an assault gun? duh.

G'morin' Stonepipe...

takenaka,

Have you read the news lately?! They're working on it...............................now....

And a GREAT morning to you CD! Hope all is well in your world.

Gun control is simple. Stiffer penalties if you are not legally armed. Gang banger with an AK = 20 to life.

@FOOL...you only mean that when you look in the mirror!!!

Gun control won't work, we already have it, what good will more do? The answer, nothing.

Time to shift to people control, start with the worthless vermin organized crime groups called the street gangs, shut them down, make being in a street gang openly at war a very unappealing activity.

Instead of handing out free unobligated money to welfare queens, make it a loan and apply a penalty for having even more children to get a 'payraise'. Tell them to get a job, or better yet, make them get married to baby daddy for a specified amount of time.

There is a serious issue with how people behave and 'free money' has a large role in it. When will we see and acknowledge that FDR's 'Great Society' has degenerated to a 'Not So Great Society', and gets worse with increasing free money?

John-1639742

Takenaka is correct. It is too easy to get a gun for a man who wants to shoot a women at a bar. It didn't help the man with the gun either. He died. We would all be safer with better, stricter gun control.

You have no information regarding how the gun was obtained, yet you jump right on the gun control bandwagon. Handguns are already under strict gun control. There's a waiting period for everyone unless they have a CCW (and if they have a CCW they've already been screened at a deeper level.) What do you propose that will not violate the 2nd Amendment and yet somehow magically prevent psychos like the one in this article from obtaining a weapon?

Gee golly people, haven't you realized that GUN CONTROL is HITTING WHAT YOU ARE AIMING AT. Just start enforcing the too many regulations on the books and this wouldn't be happening as much as it is.

gun control, now!

No, O&AEverday, YOU are the problem, and pretty much everyone like you with racist tendencies and little to no education (see remark: "well-costumed to").

Old fashioned cop work. They don't know it, but they just showed their local public that you do not "get away" with behavior like that in their town.

Never date anyone who owns a gun, 'cause when you break up ...

Gun control works real well. Ask the families of the 6 murdered in Chicago this weekend.

We say we want to keep guns out of the hands of the Psychos, and I certainly agree. But HOW do you define who is a psycho?

The guy in CT who shot all those kids was perhaps diagnosed with mental problems. But does having mental problems MAKE you a psycho? He had no police record and from what I've read no record for violence at all.

If you have depression from a death in the family, divorce, money issues, job issues, etc, and are on medications for it does THAT make you a psycho?

The 17yr old boy who shot up his family the other day? Was HE a psycho? He had no police record. No evidence of violence.

The problem is that regardless of how many controls and restrictions we put on guns, people such at these will continue to slip through the cracks. Are we going to ban guns for anyone who takes medications for any form of mental health issue?

@ Adam

Many states don't have waiting periods for handgun purchases, including my state.

Btw, I damn good at hitting my target so I already have all the gun control I need.

I have never understood why some people can't walk away from a relationship that is over and move on with their life. I guess there is a really thin line between love and hate.

Good question Al. All I know is when I start waving my 1911 around I always get good service.

You should see the service a Desert Eagle .500 will get you!

I bet! Got to try one out this summer-Wow! Have a great day.

@FOOL what the hell is a .500? The most recent model, the Mark XIX, is available in .357 Magnum, .44 Magnum, and .50 Action Express (or .50 AE). You know sh*t about anything?

Death Rider,

You don't know anything about math - .50 is the same as .500 (or .5) - they all mean 1/2 in.

Al Kyda, I dont know where you live but where I live if you are in possession of a firearm and under the influence, you get to go for a ride.

You don't know anything about math - .50 is the same as .500 (or .5) - they all mean 1/2 in.

It's about nomenclature, not math. A .50 AE is a cartridge much different from the .500 S&W Magnum. Go to a range and say you want to shoot the "fifty S&W" (or even the "five S&W") instead of the "five hundred S&W." You'll most likely get some combination of a blank stare, a laugh (at you), and a polite explanation.

Seriously though, all you anti-gun nuts, guns aren't the problem - they're the only viable defense against insane people and criminals who are armed and intent upon doing harm to you and/or your family if the cops aren't there at the time.

Disarm the criminals and wackos, not the law abiding citizens who only want to have an even chance of self defense if they're attacked by someone who doesn't let laws impede their actions.

Just saying...

What Kiwis believe is of utterly no relevance in the USA. Could it be that Kiwis are too judgmental, arrogant and priggish, and actually find the schadenfreude that results from reading about USA gun deaths very pleasing and satisfying? I think so!

Fully agree with you, jpooch00. Disarm all the criminals and wackos. And while you're at it, disarm all those family members who turn their guns on their families during private disputes. A huge percentage of the gun-related deaths in the USA are attributed to family arguments that go out of control.

It's just SO easy to pick up a gun and kill from a distance. Even a child can do it ...

Just saying ... something needs to be done.

And while you're at it, disarm all those family members who turn their guns on their families during private disputes. A huge percentage of the gun-related deaths in the USA are attributed to family arguments that go out of control.

....something needs to be done

Like do something about why these people think this is an acceptable means of confilict resolution?

KIWI, I have to admit if there was a simple solution, we'd have done it some time ago. Many of these people are "normal" until they crack-up. Many dingbats will slip through background checks, but they may help. Maybe banning assault weapons and high-capacity mags would help, a bit. But you can buy a lot more then drugs on the black market, which would get bigger to include more weapons.

Sure, we could tighten things up and slow it down, but how tight to make it and how much would it slow down? I don't really want to see police at every corner and in every public building, not to mention we don't even have that many police or could afford that. I don't like to think that every adult needs to have a CWP to feel safe either. But I sure hate to read about some unarmed innocents getting shot up.

So, what's a happy medium? That would really work, I mean.

Stunned Kiwi

Fully agree with you, jpooch00. Disarm all the criminals and wackos. And while you're at it, disarm all those family members who turn their guns on their families during private disputes. A huge percentage of the gun-related deaths in the USA are attributed to family arguments that go out of control.

It's just SO easy to pick up a gun and kill from a distance. Even a child can do it ...

Just saying ... something needs to be done.

You don't need to worry about it since you don't live here, so kindly mind your own business. We have a Constitution which gives citizens the right to own weapons. It's there for good reason. We don't need people who live in homogenous societies trying to apply their mores on us, as if one-size-fits-all. It doesn't work like that.

We have certain neighbors to the south whom we need a means to keep them in their place. Those people have many criminal elements who like to enter this country illegally with the intent to smuggle illegal drugs, and they will protect their wares with deadly force and hence bring serious firepower into the U.S.

The same goes for any criminal who is threatening the well-being of an individual and/or their families. Calling the police is part of the process, but while waiting for them to arrive the primary means for personal safety is a weapon. The most effective weapon being a firearm. Disarming the populace is not the answer, and especially should not be taken seriously from someone who doesn't even live in this country. If you do live in this country, you can always get out and move back to NZ if you don't like it here.

Stunned, your post makes too much sense for these gun nuts to understand. They all live in a fantasy world where they'll be a hero someday when they whip out their 44 magnum and slay a black, illegal, Mexican thug that invaded their home. Either that or they're genetically disposed to possess below average sized genitalia which has caused their gun fetish.

As Forrest Gump said, "Stupid is as stupid does."

Rick-911527

Stunned, your post makes too much sense for these gun nuts to understand. They all live in a fantasy world where they'll be a hero someday when they whip out their 44 magnum and slay a black, illegal, Mexican thug that invaded their home. Either that or they're genetically disposed to possess below average sized genitalia which has caused their gun fetish.

And anti-gun nuts live in a fantasy world where everyone stands in a circle and sings cumbaya and is wonderfully generous and kind. Cue the unicorns and rainbows.

The sad fact is that people are not basically good, they are basically evil, evil is the default. There are also people will not agree with your viewpoint, ever, and they are so indoctrinated in their beliefs they will kill you just for existing. Criminals will only do what pleases them, at everyone elses' expense, including kill people, rob them, etc. We cannot stop these people, regardless of 'gun control', even full confiscation proves that the evil inherent in people still exists and manifests itself in other forms just as lethal, rendering 'gun control' merely another 'feel good' measure that did nothing to curb the true problem, people.

Go back to your dream land, hopefully you won't encounter one of the evil people, but if you do, your unwillingness to fight back may get you killed, and I won't feel sorry for you either.

Stunned, your post makes too much sense for these gun nuts to understand. They all live in a fantasy world where they'll be a hero someday when they whip out their 44 magnum and slay a black, illegal, Mexican thug that invaded their home. Either that or they're genetically disposed to possess below average sized genitalia which has caused their gun fetish.

As Forrest Gump said, "Stupid is as stupid does."

Ill rememer this when I fight off the next methhead that breaks into my home with a toilet plunger instead of my Mossberg 500 and NO I dont live in a bad neighborhood. Stupid is as stupid does apparently is defending my family against two men who were intent on stealing valuables even if that meant huring my children you dummy.

Highway signs here in this state show 3280 people killed in drunk driving accidents in 2012. Yet not one liberal type is screaming about banning cars. Why is that?

@Stunned.... You really need to read up on the constitution and other letters written at the time the country was formed... I would say that the forefathers would disagree with you.

Hey Joe,

Your comment makes it sounds as if the United States doesn't have any punishment for Drinking and Driving.

Did you know that since NHTSA began recording alcohol-related statistics in 1982, drunk driving fatalities have decreased 52% from 21,113 in 1982. Since the inception of The Century Council and our national efforts to fight drunk driving, drunk driving fatalities have declined 35% from 15,827 in 1991. (Source: NHTSA/FARS, 2011).

(http://www.centurycouncil.org/drunk-driving/drunk-driving-fatalities-national-statistics)

What's the Century Council, you ask? Why it's a group formed by Distillers (Funny that the makers of alcohol would be interested in trying to prevent it's abuse) who fight to prevent DUI and underage drinking.

So clearly anti-DUI measures have had some success in the past few decades.

As for taking away cars. Last time I checked, we did have to get licensed, taking tests, return to get our licenses renewed, and if someone has shown to lack the capacities needed to operate a motor vehicle, your priveledge to do so can be revoked.

Old people have their licenses stripped all the time by concerned family members who report it into the DMV.

I was raised in a home with guns. I find it hilarious how everything is on the table when it comes to gun violence (Video games, Music, Movies, Crazy whacko registries), except the idea of maybe looking at the guns themselves.

Nah, we don't need to get rid of all of them, but there has to be some sort of common ground.

You're calling 'police' psychologically balanced?

You don't watch the news or youtube much, do you?

DesotoKim, this youtube article was so biased it's not funny. Obviously produced by an American network with strong NRA affiliations (probably financed as well) and an even stronger pro-gun agenda. Every one of the actors in it was pro-gun and pro-NRA as far as I could tell.

Australia is one of the most overly regulated, democratic countries on the planet. You can barely move sideways there without breaking a law or regulation. It also falls within those countries which are 8 times less likely to experience gun fatalities than the USA (according to the statistics quoted by Wikipedia).

And that is the real issue here. Why the extreme prevalence of gun incidents in the USA?

And why are you so interested in what the real issue is, when your knee-jerk and only response is "ban guns"? It says to me that you are not actually interested in the real issue, but derive personal enjoyment from the results, because pointing fingers at others is the only thing that really interests you. You may now sod off, Kiwi.

Oh yes, Momma did raise a fool!

@Jan - **APPLAUSE**

That was a film produced by the NRA and full of false information.

And saying is over regulated and you can barely move without breaking a law is also not true.

The US has the highest incarceration rate of any western country by a lot so I would say that would apply there (here as I am in the US).

Australia is considered the 2nd best country (first is Switzerland and the US comes in 16th) in the world to be born in based on many factors so if you really shouldn't go spouting stuff about a country you know nothing about.

But I do agree that guns don't kill people, people kill people and it is a people problem so I don't think you should keep guns away from people, you should keep people away from guns.

Hey Aussie in US...Australia sounds great! You should head back there right away, or maybe visit a local bar first and start telling everyone how messed up the USA is and get a little assisstance moving out.

Shoot 'em up! Yee hah!!!!!

I'm sure no other innocent people would have gotten shot in the cross fire!

jp

Yet another case of a bad guy with a gun being stopped by a good guy with a gun!

Was he one of those good guy's with a gun before he used that gun?

JPOOCH,

This was a bad man with a gun stopped by a good policeman with a gun, not stopped by one of the CW group. There is a difference.

If there would have been more people with guns in the bar, there may have been more people shot. Alcohol and guns don't mix well.

Whether he was or wasn't is irrelevent. He was a bad guy when the incident occured.

Take away the gun and he just gets her with a knife, ballbat, strangulation, etc.

From what little info there is this involved a crime of passion and it would have happened regardless of what was available.

Sayin' that one shouldn't try to stop a deranged person bent on homicidal mayhem because there's a possibility that innocents might get hit, is the logic of the coward who seeks any excuse to avoid an unpleasant situation and who would stand passively by waiting for their turn to be executed while the slaughter of their fellow citizens continues unabated. The police officer who stopped the bad guy had to take a chance and the reality is that a Goddamn gunfight ain't ballet school; not only can bystanders get hit, but you can too. You're gonna have to wait a long time before circumstances are perfect before you act to stop an assault, but not only is shootin' back rather than tryin' to hide or run the alternative of choice for someone who has Heart, it's also your best bet for survival. You may be the first human in history to outrun a bullet, but don't count on it.

Flnobody, he stopped being a good guy when he shot his first innocent victim.

nightwalker

JPOOCH,

This was a bad man with a gun stopped by a good policeman with a gun, not stopped by one of the CW group. There is a difference.

If there would have been more people with guns in the bar, there may have been more people shot. Alcohol and guns don't mix well.

This is all very tedious, it is not legal to carry a firearm into a bar and the people who follow it wouldn't be armed. This is another case where everyone was vulnerable to people who do not bother to follow laws. No, we don't need to rescind that law, this merely exemplifies and reinforces the fact that criminals will do their thing regardless of any laws made. Pass a mountain of laws to the moon, and a criminal still won't follow them. It also took a good guy with a gun, to stop the bad guy with a gun as well, notice that?

Steven Kage, A coward is a person that feels he needs to be armed with a gun because he believes it gives him an advantage. If guns were banned then that coward would have to defend himself with his fists but cowards won't fight unless they have an advantage.

Yes, 2Q3, I did notice that. A good POLICEMAN shot the shooter, etc

Did you read post #13, the one I was replying to? Did you even read my post as close as you thought?

nightwalker

Yes, 2Q3, I did notice that. A good POLICEMAN shot the shooter, etc

Did you read post #13, the one I was replying to? Did you even read my post as close as you thought?

Absolutely, however, asserting that only LE needs firepower is a mistake that only leads to even more violent crime.

Evil exists in people, no laws or confiscation will stop them from being so. If you want to try and slow down the evil, the good must be allowed to counteract it. All other measures are like pissing in the wind.

2q3

If you want to try and slow down the evil, the good must be allowed to counteract it.

Until the good turns evil. Which may have happened in the case (not enough info yet).

Yes, of course, but we cannot control that either.

Trying to assert control based upon the projection of future wrong doing is a false argument.

That kind of thinking can be applied to anything. Example, we will not allow you to drive, because you will wreck and kill someone at some unknown future date.

In some states you can carry concealed in a bar... it's called the designated shooter... actually driver..

You just can't drink while carrying in a bar...

Rick,

Cowards are people that carry guns for self-defense? Those who use weapons - guns, knives, clubs, etc. - to assault innocent unarmed victims are not seeking an UNFAIR ADVANTAGE? How does your twisted reasoning apply to 1000's of innocent victims of predatory violence who are beaten, raped and murdered because the assailants were bullies who knew their victims wouldn't be able to physically resist them? Your assertion that innocent victims are somehow cowards because they resist an assault by bullies who fit YOUR definition of what a coward is, i.e., someone "who won't fight unless they have an advantage", is totally absurd. Equally absurd, is your foray into the nether world of possibilities of what life would be like if guns were banned. Murder and rape are banned, but bullies still do it, taking advantage of those who are physically weaker, and often DON'T USE GUNS. Your idea of a Perfect World is where victims of illegal assaults must never have an advantage of force to protect themselves? If you tell my Granny she has to duke it out with a Goon twice her size bent on rape, she's gonna tell you to go @*#! yourself! Bless her Heart, she's gonna light up his sorry ass up with some 00!

should the children in CT have been carrying guns too? do you see how this could potentially escalate into an even bigger problem? if our only defense against threats is more guns, soon everybody has one and there are shootings in every city every day. is that the kind of society you want for your children?

Yes, it could escalate into a "bigger problem" - FOR CRIMINALS. Your assertion that the carrying of guns "creates a problem", is at its core an elitist argument. Do you believe that because police officers carry guns to protect themselves and others that this "creates a problem"? Citizens in America have the same right as agents of the state to carry deadly weapons for self-protection AND protection of others. The lower crime rates in areas that encourage, rather than discourage, PRIVATE citizens to carry, disproves your assertion that "more guns" is a problem. Unless you believe that agents of the government are cut from a finer cloth than private citizens, you shouldn't have any problem with private citizens carrying guns. Despite your desperate attempt to discredit the validity of carrying firearms for self-defense by suggesting that the arming of children would lead to chaos (I've have never heard any such proposal from supporters of the 2nd Amendment AND if ADULTS at CT had been able to resist the assault with lethal force instead of hiding under desks, there would have been less dead children), again, you reveal your elitist viewpoint, i.e., you see ALL ADULTS as children who can't be trusted with sharp objects, which is, of course, the state of tyranny that exists where members of society are vassals of a Potentate rather than citizens who have rights. After all, IF THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T TRUST ME WITH A GUN, WHY SHOULD I TRUST THE GOVERNMENT?

steven - of course i don't believe cops should have more right to carry guns than we do. I just don't think it's fair to ask everyone to saddle up and carry guns because paranoid schizophrenics are also going to be packing heat too in the name of self-defense and that'll just result in more shootings. it's a slippery slope and soon every city is going to look like oakland, ca if we do things your way.

Guns are used 250,000 times a year, thats 6849 times average, everyday to stop a crime in the US.

Why no coverage? Why no praise by the media? The advantages certainly outweigh the disadvantages. How many of those 250,000 instances saved little children, wifes, sisters, mom, dads, brothers?

You think there might be a possibility of an agenda here? I'm waiting.....

mindyabusiness,

You admit there are insane people roaming the streets who are a willing and capable of inflicting serious bodily injury upon innocent victims, yet you think the solution is that private citizens AND the police should give up their guns? I don't know, mindya, I just don't think you're gonna get very far with that one. Look, guns are dangerous instruments and there needs to be MORE regulation, but there's a big difference between REGULATING and BANNING. One approach supports the right, the other eliminates it. The focus needs to be on the mental health of a person owning a gun, not on the unrealistic goal of trying to eliminate gun ownership. The U.S. Supreme Court has recently ruled that private citizens have the right to have firearms for self-protection, so that ain't gonna change; its a done deal. It's extremely difficult even for mental health experts to predict violent behavior, so mental health checks for gun owners is gonna be far from a perfect solution, but its certainly worth the effort. Other countries have instigated mental health clearance as a requirement for gun ownership, so its not a novel approach to reasonable regulation. But everybody should be required to be evaluated, including the police. Peace.

That's some cold $h!t right there - and I agree 100%!

Let's see some proof of your allegation re: Pigotry, Feisty and David Walker. Gun nuts are disposed to lying so show some proof.

Also, I live in the country too and seem to do fine without having a loaded weapon in the house, course I don't live in fear. I also lived for forty plus years in L.A. and never felt the need to have or carry a weapon. I also don't check under my bed or look in the closet before I go to sleep at night.

Rick,

To bad the people that DID need a gun to protect themselves from a lethal assault but DIDN'T have one won't be able to post today. Maybe you'll sing a different tune if you join them. I don't have a tire jack in my trunk because I FEAR an unsuspected flat tire, and I don't carry a gun because I fear an unsuspected attack. I'm READY for both.

@Rick

Oh, the thoughts that will run through your ignorant little head a micro second before the bad guy's 9mm projectile does.

Rick is from LA, you know, where you get beat up and killed during the day at a baseball park with security all around. Go to Watts, long beach or East LA and cruise around at night see how that works for you.

mhender

I would like to add to your post if I may:

Why is it that the press doesn't say what kind of firearm he used... From all the past press we have read here the only firearm out there is an "Assult Rifle" AR-15.

Mhender,The NRA tell you that?

Probably not reported because it doesn't happen.

Rick: Actually, it does happen, surprisingly often. The lowest estimate is done by the FBI/DoJ, through their NCVS, the National Crime Victimization Survey, and their most recent number is about 116,000 annual defense firearm uses. There was a study by Kleck that estimated 2.5 million per year (which I believe grossly overestimates the number), but there was also a study done by Clinton, and I'll see if I can dig up the link for you later, it estimated 1.5 million DGUs. I think even that number was a little high, but I think the NCVS number is low -- I'd believe the true number to be somewhere in between.

Thing is, a lot of times these things aren't reported, because it's about crime averted. Some creep breaks into someones house in the middle of the night, the homeowner turns on the lights holding a gun, the creep runs out of the house, and that's the end of it. The number of times a civilian actually shoots and kills a criminal is only a few hundred times a year.

When I GROW UP I want to be an NRA Drone! Maybe then i can afford a Parrot and i'll teach him all my little NRA talking points and than i can keep my mouth closed to do what i do best; Chew Tobacco!

P.S.-"Its harder to do when your dentures are out!"

@RandogM....

I think you should check the tire pressure on your house.... looks a little low from here... or was that I.Q.?

Back East. At least i now know that you can CHEW and type at the same time. Congratulations, I am sure you are/were head of your class wherever the hell that is.......here in California in only gets you minimum wage!

@RandogM

I so enjoy watching your mental illness

Chuck. No thanks neccessary!!

Your odds of getting killed by a firearm (all types combined) in the U.S. is a small fraction of 1%. This witch hunt for guns is ridiculous.

Focusing on inanimate objects incapable of doing anything on their own is completely ignoring the real problem which is the criminal/mentally ill person behind the gun. It just shows that this witch hunt isn't about safety and/or preventing tragedies. These recent shootings are just an excuse to push an anti-gun/anti-constitution agenda by a bunch of political thumb suckers in D.C., many who are total hypocrites.

I find that the politicians who scream the loudest for gun control are those with the biggest bunch of armed guards. If they truly believed guns were so bad, wouldn't they want the minimum contact with guns possible? What makes any of you here think that the cops or government agents are any different than the rest of us? They are recruited from the same population that lives in the rest of the country. The whole gun control issue has little to do with public safety, and a whole lot to do with government control of the public.

nightwalker would be a good candidate.

Gee, RL. I thought I was being all reasonable about it all, but I see some people don't use reason. :-)

Here's a thought, you and ROCKET could move to the middle east, they LOVE guns there, and you can say or write whatever you want, and if someone doesn't like it, they can shoot you but you can shoot back so it's OK, and you don't even need any silly permits. Wouldn't that be FUN? You could own ANY gun too, how free can you get? LOL

Sorry, couldn't help it.

WilliamOfRites

He walked in Backwards and they thot he was leaving... That's how he was able to take them by suprise.

Ol Dog,
Your correct,in Wa State it is illegal to carry a weapon in a bar as well as drink and drive as well as shoot somebody,Three laws he obviously overlooked,Not a Damn thing would be different if we had more restrictive laws,when they won't obey the commonsense ones currently on the books.

Wow, learn that from the communist control and oppression manual?

You mean like discovering that the vast majority are governement sucking leaches with gang affiliations like in Chicago, DC, Philly, Detroit, NYC, LA, etc?

How many laws did he break? The idea that more laws would help is not rational.

Most of the would be Democrats and/or gang bangers and all for gun control so their victims will be unarmed.

Other than attempted murder in Washington you can't carry in a bar.

Unfortunately, I have had too much experience with gun shot wounds. A couple of rounds from an AK-47, Once from a 9mm and I still carry a grenade fragment in my back. Lost a part of a lung and don't wear shorts no matter how hot it is. Hate to have to explain all the scars all the time.

Who's Bidem?