It looks like over 200,000 guns are stolen every year, according to http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/fshbopc0510pr.cfm . At least 80% are not recovered within six months.
@ucbalumnus , that’s frightening.
@“Cardinal Fang” – maybe that should be changed so that each transaction, to be legal, must go through a FFL with full background check. Even handing guns down to your kids – run the checks, have the FFL sign off on it. I’m no expert on the process of making that 1. a law, and 2. enforceable, but – it would be nice, anyway. (as would many things that may never come to pass, but we can start by talking about it anyway…)
I’ll put this here really quickly – today was a rough day. I was a bit snappish earlier on, and if I was whiny or a grouch in here, I apologize. That continued as the football game I was watching headed to halftime. But a couple hours ago, for the first time in my life, one of my teams won a game on a true Hail Mary pass. I howled with glee and clapped loudly, waking up my wife. After apologizing to her profusely, I got back on my phone, and now I’m here. So – yay!!! Yay yay yayyyyyy! Woo hoo! 
For sure!
Absolutely. IMO gun owners should be legally liable from crimes committed with their unsecured guns.
The same type of background checks required for security clearances should be required for gun ownership.
" 1. Does the state have the right to know who has undergone psychological, psychiatric or LCSW treatment?"
We have the psychiatrist for the Aurora shooter saying “of course he said he would kill people, but many of my patients say the same thing and never do”.
So how can it matter whether we have a binary “went to counseling or not” be of any value. THE GUY SAID HE WOULD SHOOT PEOPLE. And she thought, hmm, just the average patient, no need to report.
News says they had 6100 rounds of ammo with them AND 4500 more at home (plus more weapons). As someone said above, why not restrict sales the way sudafed is restricted?
BTW, rhandco, there is a duty to warn (in some but not all states) if a patient indicates that they have a specific person they plan to target. Then you are supposed to warn that person (if you can find/reach them). But if a patient says they have fantasies of shooting people, but do not clearly pose an immediate or imminent harm to themselves or others, there is nothing to report, and they likely wont meet criteria for involuntary hospitalization.
This is an interesting twist in the story:
Other accounts refer to Thalasinos as a “Messianic Jew.” I’m not sure he was born Jewish (some Messianic Jews are; many others are gentile “converts”), but this particular victim was pretty zealous and, frankly, provocative:
More here: http://nypost.com/2015/12/03/california-massacre-victim-ranted-about-muslims-on-facebook/
I’m sure Mr. Farook was happy to be able to include Mr Thalasinos in his mass killing plan.
I am so angry right now.
“Senate Republicans voted against barring suspected terrorists, felons and the mentally ill from getting guns on Thursday afternoon, parroting National Rifle Association arguments that doing so would strip some innocent people of their constitutional rights to gun access just a day after yet another massacre on U.S. soil.”
The majority of Americans support those measures. How in the hell can they not pass? Oh yeah, I forgot they are afraid of being “primaried”
So if they are on the watch list here in the US, they can’t board a plane but they can buy guns and ammo.
Yes! and maybe held VERY liable - in other words, if your unsecured gun is used to commit a murder, maybe you should face charges equal to that.
Without a doubt.
People on the watch list haven’t been convicted of anything and some aren’t even suspected of anything.
@zoosermom If they cant board a plane, then sorry they shouldnt be able to buy a gun.
Correct. They haven’t been convicted of anything. But they have their travel restricted. Not their right to buy guns and ammo. Thats ridiculous. They are seen as a threat but are openly allowed to potentially stockpile weapons. Lovely.
They accidentally mixed up my DHs name with someone who was on the watch list back in around 2003. It was a royal PITA. Every time any of us went to check in for a flight, they’d take our drivers license (or my DH’s military ID!!) and say “oh there is a problem with your ticket- I’lll be right back”. It got to the point where we’d say “say hi to the FBI for us”, because that’s who they were calling. They even tried to retain DS#1 and me when we were having to make a gate change on a concourse. DH got detained at Heathrow and interviewed by, IIRC, Interpol (his workmates who were traveling with him were simultaneously amused and shocked.) Somehow the emails or letters or forms I filled out that I sent eventually got to the right department and we got off that list, but it was really quite a pain. But if we had wanted to, we could have walked into our local gun store and stocked up (though I have no clue how much can be purchased at any one time). Disgusting.
Cross-posted with partyof5.
I would say that it’s the watch list that is the problem and it shouldn’t be used for anything. As you say, Jym, it’s a hot mess and shouldn’t be the standard, which is my issue with the argument that it should be used to curtail ANY rights of citizens or legal residents.
We can do better than that and shouldn’t rely upon a broken tool to protect us, and I think it’s dangerous, politically-motivated rhetoric to say otherwise.
I fully support a lot of measures that would make legal gun purchasing safer (although I don’t think that will make anything of a dent in the problem - it just prevents people from looking hard at what the real dangers are any why they aren’t being addressed.)
Guns for terrorists, brought to you by the NRA and our craven politicians.
What do you propose be done, zoos?
Does anyone know if they got the third shooter? I heard there were three shooters. All I hear is about the couple, no mention of the third.
Was there for sure a third shooter?
It’s unclear, but yes, I heard multiple times that there was a third shooter. But I also heard that eyewitnesses said “he left angry and came back with his wife” as if there was no third shooter.
Here’s a conspiracy theory for you - what if the third shooter was someone trying to shoot the suspects? What if he or she shot others while trying to bring down the suspects?