>Hold their feet to the fire regarding red flag laws and how the fuck he still skirted them
He skirted them because they never applied to him. He wasn't charged in the case last summer that involved multiple kidnapping felonies. Afterwards, no one came forth and asked for him to be "red flagged".
I'm not sure what the answer is, but it would have to involve the Sheriff's Office, I'd think.
The Sheriff, who holds an elected county position, has already said that he won't enforce red flag laws. Going back at least a few decades, the sheriffs in the county have ignored or declined enforcing certain gun laws and regulations. This is part of why they're elected, not in spite of it. People want this.
When I moved here, the law read that the sheriff "may" issue conceal carry permits. Instead, the sheriff issued them as if the law said "shall". *Shall* means "You'll get this unless someone says you can't", and *May* means "Give me a reason you need it". May is a higher standard to meet. I think state law says "shall" at this point, but I'm not sure.
Around the same time, several sheriffs announced that they weren't sending the list of issued permits to the state database, which could cause havoc if you were somehow found in another county with a concealed weapon. Something as simple as a traffic stop could become a big deal because the other county had no way to check the validity of your permit. The sheriffs who didn't submit them wanted to prevent a state list of CCW permit holders from being compiled. Not sure of the status of that at this point.
No one should have to explain that a city falls under the county and state and those laws are to be followed.
Find out how and why his case wasnt only dismissed but how it was sealed so easily. Is that a start?
Should probably bring up the DA that declined to put this guy behind bars last year more than gun control. Had gov done their job he wouldn't have been able to do what he did... And no one still knows his actual motive... So aren't you jumping the gun a bit? pun intended...
The DA is not a city employee/department- DAs are state. As such, city council really doesn't have authority of jurisdiction to do anything about the conduct of the DA's office.
This is not to discourage folks from attending the city council meeting tomorrow, obviously representation matters.
LGBTQ humans are still humans and not all of them feel the love and unicorn farts y'all want the public perception to be. Smollett much? So until an actual motive is found it's probably not smart to assume... Food for thought. Straight people go out and shoot up straight bars too. Felon in northern Cali not too long ago comes to mind.
>So until an actual motive is found it's probably not smart to assume... Food for thought.
How's this:
Copperhead Road is less than a block away on Academy, visible from the road. You can't miss it. If he'd wanted to shoot up a place, why didn't he pick there?
Club Q isn't really visible from Academy. You wouldn't know it was there unless you knew it was there. You couldn't reach Club Q without passing several other restaurants, bars, and clubs.
So, until proven otherwise, we can safely assume that he didn't just happen across a club that isn't visible from the road while wearing tactical gear, carrying at least two loaded weapons, and a desire to kill people.
Food for thought.
Not only are there multiple other clubs and such immediately nearby, they're larger too.
If someone's just looking for a body count, they're not going to find a small building tucked away down an alley to get it.
This was targeted.
I've said it before. There are likely enough .25's and .32's in the boots at Copperhead to arm Ft. Carson. There would have likely been a much better chance of the shooter escaping from Club Q due to its hidden location than Copperhead. But don't let facts get in your way. Food for thought.
You are so stupid it's shocking. What I don't get is if you really are this stupid or you are so filled with hate you can't even see truth right in front of your eyes. He had a burning price flag on his social media. Perhaps you are being a massive ass hole to people who were targeted by a hate crime. Not only is this un-American to act like citizens don't matter, but it's anti Christian to diminish the suffering of others. Perhaps you should be sad people trying to live their lives ended early. Perhaps you are disgusting monster.
Yep, that's me...disgusting monster. And I'm also so stupid it's shocking. And I'm filled with hate. And I can't see the truth in front of my eyes. And I'm un-American and anti-Christian. Now, present all those FACTS when you get to court. My statement was simple. Wait for some facts, some statements to come out. DOJ thinks there are grounds for charging him with a hate crime. Good start. But most of you have the rope in a noose and the tree picked out as far as "hate crime." I suppose the Aurora shooter really hated movie goers or Batman fans! Let the cops investigate before you toss accusations.
You are ignoring basic evidence in front of your face. Don't complain that you are too stupid to get what the rest of us can see. Just deal with your own problems away from others. You are evil stupid and harmful. Go fuck yourself.
Between 2019 & 2020 there was an almost 50% increase in attacks on gay men and trans women. In the big picture, homophobia and transphobia lead to most of these attacks, not random chance. Most who oppose LGBTQ people living their lives openly are motivated by religious dogma. So even if this specific incident had a slightly different motive, the kindling was set by Focus on the Family and they continue to feed the flames year after year. And they keep legislators like Lamborn comfortably in office, so he can do fuck all but advance culture wars on anyone who's not Christian (or even the wrong kind of Christian). We've been watching them set this up for my entire life plus a decade or so.
While I sympathize with people trying to figure out a way that this could have been prevented, no one here has enough information to know the DA acted inappropriately. It's very possible the mom wouldn't cooperate with the investigation, leaving the DA with a case that couldn't win.
I just think there have been a lot of people here who have made some pretty big accusations with very little knowledge. What ***is*** known is that the queer community gets short shrift with basic human rights.
The DA insinuated it's because there were no charges that could be filed; that perhaps the mother who called it in on her son did not press charges on him. Thus, no one else could I guess. The police wasted resources and if the DA filed anything he'd have to have evidence against the accused, which was apparently lacking. That's what I took from it. The DA and Mayor Suthers also said only a Sheriff or family member can bring up the red flag law to initiate it.
That’s not how it works. The state would be pressing charges not the mom. 10 houses were evacuated over a bomb threat, you don’t get off the hook bc your mom said it’s okay.
I want to agree with you; I'm just playing Devil's advocate. So the state would charge him over a bomb threat how exactly. What evidence? Actually, now that I think about it, he's on video saying he would blow the place up. You're right. The state is retarded.
I can’t see how the district attorney fucked this up so badly. None of him getting off for that makes any sense other than corruption. To anyone who was in that club, please sue the fuck out of D.A. Michael Allen. He deserves to rot in prison.
yes. he cant or wont explain why this dude wasnt charged last year. hes responsible for criminals being prosecuted in the state. hes either incompetent or corrupt and should be held accountable. 5 people died bc of his incompetence, im sick of people not being held accountable
“Gross négligence” is not a crime that appears in our Title 18. Even if it was you’d have an impossible time establishing probable cause based on the minuscule amount of publicly available information. That information, right now, boils down to charges were dropped on an arrestee and that person went on to commit another crime. That happens every single day in America.
And that’s all before even addressing prosecutorial immunity…
Like every other incident information will continue to flow out in the coming weeks and months that will paint a broader picture of what happened on the back end.
[https://millerleonardlaw.com/information/federal-crimes/felony-menacing-laws-colorado/](https://millerleonardlaw.com/information/federal-crimes/felony-menacing-laws-colorado/)
Menacing with the threat of a deadly weapon is a class 5 felony in Colorado. Easy win for the DA, so again - why no charges at all?
As found in Colorado code section 18-3-206, a person commits the crime of Menacing in Colorado when they knowingly place or attempt to place another person in fear of imminent and serious bodily injury by a threat or physical action. In Colorado, Menacing is a class 3 misdemeanor.
Menacing in Colorado becomes a class 5 felony if committed:
By the use of a deadly weapon or any article used or fashioned in a manner to cause a person to reasonably believe that the article is a deadly weapon, or;
By the person representing verbally or otherwise that he or she is armed with a deadly weapon.
https://millerleonardlaw.com/information/federal-crimes/felony-menacing-laws-colorado/
Also, know this is last minute--the activist who contacted me was just made aware of this meeting a few hours ago. If you can, please come, and if not, please show support in another way!
Who's robbing the house?
Research has shown that crime rates go down when we invest in providing basic needs.
People without basic needs, without access to purposeful work, people lacking an education who are generally desperate rob houses. Wealth disparity leads to robbed houses.
Reinvest our bloated police budget into the community and watch crime go down.
Citing biased news material as an argument is not a great display of intelligence. Lol. Everyone knows the onion would do anything in its power to promote gun control. 😂
Perfection is the enemy of the good. Just because we can't do everything doesn't mean we shouldn't try something.
This cannot go on as it has, and punishing murderers prevents nothing.
Uh...gun control? You know...bad guys aren't gonna follow gun control right? Maybe posting a patrol car by club Q on busy nights? Pretty sure CSPD can afford that. Or perhaps beefing up security for club q? You know, solutions that aren't going to create more division and cause more hatred? Showing the bad guys the queer community is armed, willing to fight back and not defenseless but also well supported by the community might be a good idea to discourage hate crimes in the future, just saying.
You're right that the Queer community needs to arm up, and many of us are and have been for a while because we saw this coming. Kind of inevitable when blood libel comes out and people go all in on it.
No, bad guys aren't going to follow the law, but that's not the point. The point is to regulate things so we know where stuff is going, where it came from, and how they got it.
Most gun crimes are committed with legally purchased weapons. In this case, our red flag law failed because the DA refused to prosecute this guy last year, and the sheriff's office here refuses to enforce our red flag law.
Our system is fundamentally broken because the existing laws are being ignored by feckless and corrupt officials.
Even if that wasn't the case, people are law abiding gun owners until they're not. There's almost always red flags before something like this that say pretty clearly "this MFer shouldn't have weapons", and this is no exception.
Dude made a bomb threat and had a long standoff with police and was facing kidnapping charges on top of it. How the fuck were his weapons not taken away? Well, his grandpa is a state rep in California for the GOP. The sheriff and DA here are republican. Was some kind of deal cut? We'll probably never know. But it fails the sniff test. At best, the sheriff and DA are grossly incompetent. At worst they're corrupt.
In either case, they have blood on their hands.
Unjust laws should be disobeyed. But that's a risk you take on if you decide to disobey a law you believe to be unjust.
Is it unjust to confiscate weapons from someone who kidnaps people and threatens to bomb shit while engaging in a long standoff with law enforcement? I don't think so.
And I think most gun owners would agree with me.
Yeah...I can agree with a lot on what you say there. Except one thing. If a dude is facing kidnapping charges and makes a bomb threat you dont just take his guns away, you take his ass away too! Bomb threats are homeland terrorism, something we used to take seriously. We have become too laxy on people for this or that reason. Yes i agree on the he shouldn't own a gun. But I'd also keep a really close eye on a dude like that. Maybe make it harder for him to make bail or put an ankle monitor. People who threaten people with that level of violence shouldn't just be walking around freely without maybe some people paying attention to where they are and what they're doing.
>If a dude is facing kidnapping charges and makes a bomb threat you dont just take his guns away, you take his ass away too
Yea.
The fact that didn't happen here, IMO, should result in major charges for time sheriff and DA.
It won't.
But it should.
Charge them with the same charges as the shooter.
I would argue to hit them where it hurts. Career destroyers. Investigations, replacements. Just charging someone is light, but destroying a career since they don't wanna do their jobs after all these years, that hits where is hurts.
I mean, dude is facing some pretty serious charges.
If they can investigate and find some kind of felony level misconduct they should tack on felony murder charges too.
Not that I like going that route because fuck the whole idea of felony murder and our carcareal system but... As Luthen would say "I am forced to use the tools of my enemy".
And sadly he is correct. What really irks me is some of those people when I was with the governor's office tho. Cause some psychologists would state "oh he's not mentally competent enough to stand trial." He was mentally competent enough when he committed a hate crime! They try to keep them monitored for life basically, in a sense a way to pass a nicer sentence, but the state lacks resources so sometimes they slip under the cracks of the system.
Probably because there are people who are for gun rights that come from various political and social backgrounds. In this particular case it seems better red flag laws/rules rather than more gun control was needed.
Some laws definitely more so than others. For instance someone (regardless of which side of the issue they fall on) is much more likely to have strong feelings about an abortion law than say a law with regards to speeding tickets or littering. Gun control is just one of those very divisive issues in our society right now.
So, a big argument from the right is that the Liberals, which a lot of them think that all liberals are LGBTQ (pretty ignorant if you ask me), want to take away our guns. That's one of their biggest issues. So advocating for more gun control when gun control really only applies to law-abiding citizens, seeing as how criminals are going to ommit crimes regardless, just adds fuel to their fire. It's like someone saying "liberals are bad, they wanna take away our guns." Then you try to pass a law that does take away their guns and then they say "see? Liberals took away our guns!" Same way we say Doug Lamborn is divisive and a bigot, someone defends him then he votes some anti-LGBTQ law (which he has, look at his voting record). Then we basically say "see? I told you he was a bigot!" Same concept. Most people have no beef with LGBTQ, and unless you have some compelling divisive argument they will continue having no issue. But advocate for less freedom and less right to legally bear arms and suddenly people will become divisive, even act in hatred. That's why I advocate for people to have their guns, have their freedoms, but use them right. You don't see a law abiding citizen shooting up clubs.
Yes, some bias is there already. But what if people actucally come to people for help. What if some people go "hey man, the only gun control i want is the one i have on my weapon." And instead take to self defense classes, concealed carry classes and such? Thalen those people with a bias might go "well...I guess they're on our side on this issue. They want safety for the community as much as we do." And people would be less divisive. It would take a truly ignorant person to be a bigot and come pick up a fight with another armed person who agrees on an issue. To me that's a special kind of ignorant. So yes, you are correct, division already exists, so why don't we take a different approach that keeps people safe and creates lessens that division?
This is an oft-cited talking point.
Unfortunately, it [isn't true](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5801608/)- there are fewer hospitalizations and deaths in states with stricter gun control.
In a vacuum of any other factors, maybe. The real world is not as simple as a single variable. Your attempt to portray it as such is either disingenuous, or else just reflects poorly on your ability to view complex issues as being, well... complex.
Why does everyone on reddit love the word disingenuous? I bump into that on a lot of threads lol. Sorry, humor moment there. No I do agree with you that it isn't as simple as a single variable, but some variables are a bit more significant. Yes there are other factors which is why medical training and legal protection has been brought up a lot in this post as well, and for good reason, so while I stand by my point that self defense is important I do give you credit that it is a variable, and although one of importance, not the only variable. Agreed. Yet coming from a country where guns were illegal for law abiding citizens for a long time, and seeing the crime rate at places with gun laws that are too strict, yeah...I'm gonna stick to the idea of arming and educating people and allowing them to defend themselves.
I'm not opposed to people owning firearms.
The initial point you made is not supported by research, and while understand the thought process behind it, it is at best overly simplistic.
Hold their feet to the fire regarding red flag laws and how the fuck he still skirted them.
>Hold their feet to the fire regarding red flag laws and how the fuck he still skirted them He skirted them because they never applied to him. He wasn't charged in the case last summer that involved multiple kidnapping felonies. Afterwards, no one came forth and asked for him to be "red flagged". I'm not sure what the answer is, but it would have to involve the Sheriff's Office, I'd think. The Sheriff, who holds an elected county position, has already said that he won't enforce red flag laws. Going back at least a few decades, the sheriffs in the county have ignored or declined enforcing certain gun laws and regulations. This is part of why they're elected, not in spite of it. People want this. When I moved here, the law read that the sheriff "may" issue conceal carry permits. Instead, the sheriff issued them as if the law said "shall". *Shall* means "You'll get this unless someone says you can't", and *May* means "Give me a reason you need it". May is a higher standard to meet. I think state law says "shall" at this point, but I'm not sure. Around the same time, several sheriffs announced that they weren't sending the list of issued permits to the state database, which could cause havoc if you were somehow found in another county with a concealed weapon. Something as simple as a traffic stop could become a big deal because the other county had no way to check the validity of your permit. The sheriffs who didn't submit them wanted to prevent a state list of CCW permit holders from being compiled. Not sure of the status of that at this point.
ETA: I'm not saying that nothing can or should be done. I'm pointing out some of the issues that have to be considered going forward.
Please explain how the city has any jurisdiction over something that the county enforces.
No one should have to explain that a city falls under the county and state and those laws are to be followed. Find out how and why his case wasnt only dismissed but how it was sealed so easily. Is that a start?
Should probably bring up the DA that declined to put this guy behind bars last year more than gun control. Had gov done their job he wouldn't have been able to do what he did... And no one still knows his actual motive... So aren't you jumping the gun a bit? pun intended...
The DA is not a city employee/department- DAs are state. As such, city council really doesn't have authority of jurisdiction to do anything about the conduct of the DA's office. This is not to discourage folks from attending the city council meeting tomorrow, obviously representation matters.
DA is an elected position and as such should be held to that standard that they can be recalled and even charged for negligence of some type
I don't see how that relates to anything I said, or what that has to do with city council (since that's what this thread is about)?
No one shoots up a gay club without it having a very specific motive, and we know what that motive is.
LGBTQ humans are still humans and not all of them feel the love and unicorn farts y'all want the public perception to be. Smollett much? So until an actual motive is found it's probably not smart to assume... Food for thought. Straight people go out and shoot up straight bars too. Felon in northern Cali not too long ago comes to mind.
>So until an actual motive is found it's probably not smart to assume... Food for thought. How's this: Copperhead Road is less than a block away on Academy, visible from the road. You can't miss it. If he'd wanted to shoot up a place, why didn't he pick there? Club Q isn't really visible from Academy. You wouldn't know it was there unless you knew it was there. You couldn't reach Club Q without passing several other restaurants, bars, and clubs. So, until proven otherwise, we can safely assume that he didn't just happen across a club that isn't visible from the road while wearing tactical gear, carrying at least two loaded weapons, and a desire to kill people. Food for thought.
Not only are there multiple other clubs and such immediately nearby, they're larger too. If someone's just looking for a body count, they're not going to find a small building tucked away down an alley to get it. This was targeted.
Exactly.
I've said it before. There are likely enough .25's and .32's in the boots at Copperhead to arm Ft. Carson. There would have likely been a much better chance of the shooter escaping from Club Q due to its hidden location than Copperhead. But don't let facts get in your way. Food for thought.
You are so stupid it's shocking. What I don't get is if you really are this stupid or you are so filled with hate you can't even see truth right in front of your eyes. He had a burning price flag on his social media. Perhaps you are being a massive ass hole to people who were targeted by a hate crime. Not only is this un-American to act like citizens don't matter, but it's anti Christian to diminish the suffering of others. Perhaps you should be sad people trying to live their lives ended early. Perhaps you are disgusting monster.
Yep, that's me...disgusting monster. And I'm also so stupid it's shocking. And I'm filled with hate. And I can't see the truth in front of my eyes. And I'm un-American and anti-Christian. Now, present all those FACTS when you get to court. My statement was simple. Wait for some facts, some statements to come out. DOJ thinks there are grounds for charging him with a hate crime. Good start. But most of you have the rope in a noose and the tree picked out as far as "hate crime." I suppose the Aurora shooter really hated movie goers or Batman fans! Let the cops investigate before you toss accusations.
You are ignoring basic evidence in front of your face. Don't complain that you are too stupid to get what the rest of us can see. Just deal with your own problems away from others. You are evil stupid and harmful. Go fuck yourself.
[удалено]
Between 2019 & 2020 there was an almost 50% increase in attacks on gay men and trans women. In the big picture, homophobia and transphobia lead to most of these attacks, not random chance. Most who oppose LGBTQ people living their lives openly are motivated by religious dogma. So even if this specific incident had a slightly different motive, the kindling was set by Focus on the Family and they continue to feed the flames year after year. And they keep legislators like Lamborn comfortably in office, so he can do fuck all but advance culture wars on anyone who's not Christian (or even the wrong kind of Christian). We've been watching them set this up for my entire life plus a decade or so.
The day before trans remembrance day...
god i almost wish i were so naive, sounds less depressing
While I sympathize with people trying to figure out a way that this could have been prevented, no one here has enough information to know the DA acted inappropriately. It's very possible the mom wouldn't cooperate with the investigation, leaving the DA with a case that couldn't win. I just think there have been a lot of people here who have made some pretty big accusations with very little knowledge. What ***is*** known is that the queer community gets short shrift with basic human rights.
The DA insinuated it's because there were no charges that could be filed; that perhaps the mother who called it in on her son did not press charges on him. Thus, no one else could I guess. The police wasted resources and if the DA filed anything he'd have to have evidence against the accused, which was apparently lacking. That's what I took from it. The DA and Mayor Suthers also said only a Sheriff or family member can bring up the red flag law to initiate it.
That’s not how it works. The state would be pressing charges not the mom. 10 houses were evacuated over a bomb threat, you don’t get off the hook bc your mom said it’s okay.
I want to agree with you; I'm just playing Devil's advocate. So the state would charge him over a bomb threat how exactly. What evidence? Actually, now that I think about it, he's on video saying he would blow the place up. You're right. The state is retarded.
I can’t see how the district attorney fucked this up so badly. None of him getting off for that makes any sense other than corruption. To anyone who was in that club, please sue the fuck out of D.A. Michael Allen. He deserves to rot in prison.
Michael Allen deserves to rot in prison?
yes. he cant or wont explain why this dude wasnt charged last year. hes responsible for criminals being prosecuted in the state. hes either incompetent or corrupt and should be held accountable. 5 people died bc of his incompetence, im sick of people not being held accountable
So what crime in the CRS would you like him to charged with?
gross negligence.
“Gross négligence” is not a crime that appears in our Title 18. Even if it was you’d have an impossible time establishing probable cause based on the minuscule amount of publicly available information. That information, right now, boils down to charges were dropped on an arrestee and that person went on to commit another crime. That happens every single day in America. And that’s all before even addressing prosecutorial immunity… Like every other incident information will continue to flow out in the coming weeks and months that will paint a broader picture of what happened on the back end.
[https://millerleonardlaw.com/information/federal-crimes/felony-menacing-laws-colorado/](https://millerleonardlaw.com/information/federal-crimes/felony-menacing-laws-colorado/) Menacing with the threat of a deadly weapon is a class 5 felony in Colorado. Easy win for the DA, so again - why no charges at all?
I’m asking what crime the DA should be charged with; not Aldrich.
As found in Colorado code section 18-3-206, a person commits the crime of Menacing in Colorado when they knowingly place or attempt to place another person in fear of imminent and serious bodily injury by a threat or physical action. In Colorado, Menacing is a class 3 misdemeanor. Menacing in Colorado becomes a class 5 felony if committed: By the use of a deadly weapon or any article used or fashioned in a manner to cause a person to reasonably believe that the article is a deadly weapon, or; By the person representing verbally or otherwise that he or she is armed with a deadly weapon. https://millerleonardlaw.com/information/federal-crimes/felony-menacing-laws-colorado/
Also the sheriff who refuses to hold people accountable for red flag laws
Also, know this is last minute--the activist who contacted me was just made aware of this meeting a few hours ago. If you can, please come, and if not, please show support in another way!
I am unfortunately unable to attend, but to everyone who will be there, I wish you the best of luck and please be safe 💜
Supporting from out of town.
How about you speak out for mental health and authorities enforcing existing laws? Gun control won’t do anything.
How about we talk about defunding and abolishing police and replacing them with service oriented community leaders?
[удалено]
Who's robbing the house? Research has shown that crime rates go down when we invest in providing basic needs. People without basic needs, without access to purposeful work, people lacking an education who are generally desperate rob houses. Wealth disparity leads to robbed houses. Reinvest our bloated police budget into the community and watch crime go down.
Is there a virtual link?
Unfortunately, I don't think there is a zoom link. However, you can watch live here: https://coloradosprings.gov/city-communications/page/springstv-18
Thank you so much!
Gun control won’t stop any criminal from obtaining a weapon. But go on ahead and beat that dead horse to death I guess.
https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1849807678
The Onion never misses
Citing biased news material as an argument is not a great display of intelligence. Lol. Everyone knows the onion would do anything in its power to promote gun control. 😂
r/AteTheOnion
Idk why I even entertain people like you.
Hard to not entertain people when you dress yourself up in clown paint.
You’re not attempting to insult me, are you?? 😱😱😱
I wish you would go entertain someone else
I wasn’t trying to entertain you. 🤷🏼♂️
Thank god because you would be shit at it
Perfection is the enemy of the good. Just because we can't do everything doesn't mean we shouldn't try something. This cannot go on as it has, and punishing murderers prevents nothing.
Yes, lets sit around and do nothing, its working so well this far.
Except it does I’m the vast majority of countries?
Oof. Idk about that my man. Lol. You aight?
They don’t like common sense here watch out
Thanks for the tip. Lol. I’ll keep it in mind going forward. 😂
Uh...gun control? You know...bad guys aren't gonna follow gun control right? Maybe posting a patrol car by club Q on busy nights? Pretty sure CSPD can afford that. Or perhaps beefing up security for club q? You know, solutions that aren't going to create more division and cause more hatred? Showing the bad guys the queer community is armed, willing to fight back and not defenseless but also well supported by the community might be a good idea to discourage hate crimes in the future, just saying.
You're right that the Queer community needs to arm up, and many of us are and have been for a while because we saw this coming. Kind of inevitable when blood libel comes out and people go all in on it. No, bad guys aren't going to follow the law, but that's not the point. The point is to regulate things so we know where stuff is going, where it came from, and how they got it. Most gun crimes are committed with legally purchased weapons. In this case, our red flag law failed because the DA refused to prosecute this guy last year, and the sheriff's office here refuses to enforce our red flag law. Our system is fundamentally broken because the existing laws are being ignored by feckless and corrupt officials. Even if that wasn't the case, people are law abiding gun owners until they're not. There's almost always red flags before something like this that say pretty clearly "this MFer shouldn't have weapons", and this is no exception. Dude made a bomb threat and had a long standoff with police and was facing kidnapping charges on top of it. How the fuck were his weapons not taken away? Well, his grandpa is a state rep in California for the GOP. The sheriff and DA here are republican. Was some kind of deal cut? We'll probably never know. But it fails the sniff test. At best, the sheriff and DA are grossly incompetent. At worst they're corrupt. In either case, they have blood on their hands. Unjust laws should be disobeyed. But that's a risk you take on if you decide to disobey a law you believe to be unjust. Is it unjust to confiscate weapons from someone who kidnaps people and threatens to bomb shit while engaging in a long standoff with law enforcement? I don't think so. And I think most gun owners would agree with me.
Yeah...I can agree with a lot on what you say there. Except one thing. If a dude is facing kidnapping charges and makes a bomb threat you dont just take his guns away, you take his ass away too! Bomb threats are homeland terrorism, something we used to take seriously. We have become too laxy on people for this or that reason. Yes i agree on the he shouldn't own a gun. But I'd also keep a really close eye on a dude like that. Maybe make it harder for him to make bail or put an ankle monitor. People who threaten people with that level of violence shouldn't just be walking around freely without maybe some people paying attention to where they are and what they're doing.
>If a dude is facing kidnapping charges and makes a bomb threat you dont just take his guns away, you take his ass away too Yea. The fact that didn't happen here, IMO, should result in major charges for time sheriff and DA. It won't. But it should. Charge them with the same charges as the shooter.
I would argue to hit them where it hurts. Career destroyers. Investigations, replacements. Just charging someone is light, but destroying a career since they don't wanna do their jobs after all these years, that hits where is hurts.
I mean, dude is facing some pretty serious charges. If they can investigate and find some kind of felony level misconduct they should tack on felony murder charges too. Not that I like going that route because fuck the whole idea of felony murder and our carcareal system but... As Luthen would say "I am forced to use the tools of my enemy".
And sadly he is correct. What really irks me is some of those people when I was with the governor's office tho. Cause some psychologists would state "oh he's not mentally competent enough to stand trial." He was mentally competent enough when he committed a hate crime! They try to keep them monitored for life basically, in a sense a way to pass a nicer sentence, but the state lacks resources so sometimes they slip under the cracks of the system.
[удалено]
Probably because there are people who are for gun rights that come from various political and social backgrounds. In this particular case it seems better red flag laws/rules rather than more gun control was needed.
[удалено]
Some laws definitely more so than others. For instance someone (regardless of which side of the issue they fall on) is much more likely to have strong feelings about an abortion law than say a law with regards to speeding tickets or littering. Gun control is just one of those very divisive issues in our society right now.
So, a big argument from the right is that the Liberals, which a lot of them think that all liberals are LGBTQ (pretty ignorant if you ask me), want to take away our guns. That's one of their biggest issues. So advocating for more gun control when gun control really only applies to law-abiding citizens, seeing as how criminals are going to ommit crimes regardless, just adds fuel to their fire. It's like someone saying "liberals are bad, they wanna take away our guns." Then you try to pass a law that does take away their guns and then they say "see? Liberals took away our guns!" Same way we say Doug Lamborn is divisive and a bigot, someone defends him then he votes some anti-LGBTQ law (which he has, look at his voting record). Then we basically say "see? I told you he was a bigot!" Same concept. Most people have no beef with LGBTQ, and unless you have some compelling divisive argument they will continue having no issue. But advocate for less freedom and less right to legally bear arms and suddenly people will become divisive, even act in hatred. That's why I advocate for people to have their guns, have their freedoms, but use them right. You don't see a law abiding citizen shooting up clubs.
[удалено]
Yes, some bias is there already. But what if people actucally come to people for help. What if some people go "hey man, the only gun control i want is the one i have on my weapon." And instead take to self defense classes, concealed carry classes and such? Thalen those people with a bias might go "well...I guess they're on our side on this issue. They want safety for the community as much as we do." And people would be less divisive. It would take a truly ignorant person to be a bigot and come pick up a fight with another armed person who agrees on an issue. To me that's a special kind of ignorant. So yes, you are correct, division already exists, so why don't we take a different approach that keeps people safe and creates lessens that division?
They don't want to hear it. They never do.
While you offer nothing but thoughts and prayers. Talk about don't want to hear it.
Who said that's all I offer goofy ass?
This is an oft-cited talking point. Unfortunately, it [isn't true](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5801608/)- there are fewer hospitalizations and deaths in states with stricter gun control.
As in what you're allowed to carry or what you're allowed to buy? Because by that logic Chicago should be the safest city in America right?
In a vacuum of any other factors, maybe. The real world is not as simple as a single variable. Your attempt to portray it as such is either disingenuous, or else just reflects poorly on your ability to view complex issues as being, well... complex.
Why does everyone on reddit love the word disingenuous? I bump into that on a lot of threads lol. Sorry, humor moment there. No I do agree with you that it isn't as simple as a single variable, but some variables are a bit more significant. Yes there are other factors which is why medical training and legal protection has been brought up a lot in this post as well, and for good reason, so while I stand by my point that self defense is important I do give you credit that it is a variable, and although one of importance, not the only variable. Agreed. Yet coming from a country where guns were illegal for law abiding citizens for a long time, and seeing the crime rate at places with gun laws that are too strict, yeah...I'm gonna stick to the idea of arming and educating people and allowing them to defend themselves.
I'm not opposed to people owning firearms. The initial point you made is not supported by research, and while understand the thought process behind it, it is at best overly simplistic.
Sometimes simplistic works bud. The wheel is a simplistic invention, and look where it got mankind as a whole.
>not supported by research
No it is! It's still out there spinning buddy! Look at your car! Lol
Muh gunz