Allen Texas shooting

[Fireballer 2,692]

22 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

Bro still thinks it's fake

Well, the dude you posted a tweet from used random, unrelated Nazi wedding pics to make you think it was the shooter.

[GutterBoy 2,900]

4 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

Well, the dude you posted a tweet from used random, unrelated Nazi wedding pics to make you think it was the shooter.

No he didn't.  He included those pics with the shooters comment on the bottom "My kind of people"

[The Real timschochet 7,534]

58 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

 

Which would prohibit him from purchasing firearms. Like I said. 

 

Except that the state of Texas doesn’t require background checks for private sales of firearms, so he WAS able to legally purchase it from a private seller. Which is why so many of us object to this loophole. Do you? 

[5-Points 3,838]

10 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Except that the state of Texas doesn’t require background checks for private sales of firearms, so he WAS able to legally purchase it from a private seller. Which is why so many of us object to this loophole. Do you? 

If he bought them privately it is still an illegal purchase as he was prohibited from buying/owning firearms. 

And no, I don't support the government getting involved in private transactions. 

[The Real timschochet 7,534]

1 minute ago, 5-Points said:

If he bought them privately it is still an illegal purchase as he was prohibited from buying/owning firearms. 

And no, I don't support the government getting involved in private transactions. 

If the government doesn’t get involved how can it be an illegal purchase? Do you think law is an objective concept that requires no means of enforcement? 

[The Real timschochet 7,534]

4 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

 

And no, I don't support the government getting involved in private transactions. 

How is this any different from the radical leftists who want to defund the police? 

[5-Points 3,838]

42 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

If the government doesn’t get involved how can it be an illegal purchase? Do you think law is an objective concept that requires no means of enforcement? 

He was prohibited from purchasing firearms due to his being a whack job who got kicked out the military for being a whack job. 

A prohibited person circumventing a BGC by purchasing a firearm from a private seller is still a crime on the buyer's part. If he purchased them at a gun store then it's a NICS failure. 

[5-Points 3,838]

48 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

How is this any different from the radical leftists who want to defund the police? 

How is it at all the same? 

Should the government be able to force you to charge sales tax if you have a garage sale? 

If I put an old chair out on the curb with a FREE sign on it and you come by and pick it up, should you have to declare the value as income? 

If I trade or sell a friend or relative a firearm, from a hypothetical collection, I don't think the government should have any involvement whatsoever. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,340]

20 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

He was prohibited from purchasing firearms due to his being a whack job who got kicked out the military for being a whack job. 

A prohibited person circumventing a BGC by purchasing a firearm from a private seller is still a crime on the buyer's part. If he purchased them at a gun store then it's a NICS failure. 

Do we know WHEN he purchased the firearms?  Also, you would have to know what he was discharged under in order to apply federal law.  A dishonorable discharge means that FOR SURE you cannot purchase firearms.  There are numerous types of discharges other than "honorable", though, that you could be separated from service with.  If the commanding officer was sympathetic he might have gotten one of the more milder discharges instead of honorable or section 8 (unfit for service).  We need those details in order to find out what discharge he got.

I'm assuming that if he was separated under a discharge that federal law says "no firearm purchase", it would have been in the system on a background check and it SHOULD have triggered a flag and the FFL could not sell it to him legally.  Again, I'm assuming here.

[The Real timschochet 7,534]

19 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

How is it at all the same? 

Should the government be able to force you to charge sales tax if you have a garage sale? 

If I put an old chair out on the curb with a FREE sign on it and you come by and pick it up, should you have to declare the value as income? 

If I trade or sell a friend or relative a firearm, from a hypothetical collection, I don't think the government should have any involvement whatsoever. 

Your first two examples don’t involve the sale of a deadly weapon that society has determined certain people shouldn’t have the legal right to own. 
 

We can all agree that convicted felons and mentally ill people and those on terrorist watch list should not be allowed to possess deadly firearms. But your position makes it impossible to enforce such a law. 

[5-Points 3,838]

4 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Do we know WHEN he purchased the firearms?  Also, you would have to know what he was discharged under in order to apply federal law.  A dishonorable discharge means that FOR SURE you cannot purchase firearms.  There are numerous types of discharges other than "honorable", though, that you could be separated from service with.  If the commanding officer was sympathetic he might have gotten one of the more milder discharges instead of honorable or section 8 (unfit for service).  We need those details in order to find out what discharge he got.

I'm assuming that if he was separated under a discharge that federal law says "no firearm purchase", it would have been in the system on a background check and it SHOULD have triggered a flag and the FFL could not sell it to him legally.  Again, I'm assuming here.

I've asked the same question and have not gotten an answer. However, considering he enlisted in the Army at 18 and was discharged within 18 months, it's unlikely he purchased any firearms prior to his brief service. Although he could've purchased them during the 18 months prior to being discharged for being a head-case. 

 GutterBoy provided this tidbit of info:

Garcia received an "uncharacterized" discharge, which is common for recruits who don't make it through training or the first 180 days, according to a defense official who also spoke on condition of anonymity. That type of discharge — which is not dishonorable — would not set off red flags or require any reports to law enforcement.

It was also reported that his discharge was due to "mental issues." So if the Army kicked him out, in under 180 days, because he was a head-case, one could reasonably assume that they didnt want him around guns due to his focked-up-in-the-headedness. 

And yes, that SHOULD have thrown a flag in NICS but who knows? 

 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,340]

8 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

I've asked the same question and have not gotten an answer. However, considering he enlisted in the Army at 18 and was discharged within 18 months, it's unlikely he purchased any firearms prior to his brief service. Although he could've purchased them during the 18 months prior to being discharged for being a head-case. 

 GutterBoy provided this tidbit of info:

Garcia received an "uncharacterized" discharge, which is common for recruits who don't make it through training or the first 180 days, according to a defense official who also spoke on condition of anonymity. That type of discharge — which is not dishonorable — would not set off red flags or require any reports to law enforcement.

It was also reported that his discharge was due to "mental issues." So if the Army kicked him out, in under 180 days, because he was a head-case, one could reasonably assume that they didnt want him around guns due to his focked-up-in-the-headedness. 

And yes, that SHOULD have thrown a flag in NICS but who knows? 

If he was discharged under that, then it would not have thrown any flags, by law.  I think only one or two types of discharges would have prevented him from purchasing guns and it they didn't use those ones.   If they thought he was crazy then they should have used the appropriate discharge but they didn't and so he was able to buy guns.  I'm not sure if that's on the Army or if they had their hands tied on what they could discharge him with.  In any event, what the commanders and other service members thought about him is irrelevant if they didn't use the appropriate discharge.  By law, he was legally able to purchase them.

[5-Points 3,838]

7 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Your first two examples don’t involve the sale of a deadly weapon that society has determined certain people shouldn’t have the legal right to own. 
 

We can all agree that convicted felons and mentally ill people and those on terrorist watch list should not be allowed to possess deadly firearms. But your position makes it impossible to enforce such a law. 

All of my examples involve private transactions. I don't feel the object involved in the transaction is relevant, you do. We differ here. 

It IS impossible to enforce such law. Every single one of those people can obtain a firearm illegally. 

However, since you brought up enforcement, if we actually enforced the laws already on the books, instead of allowing plea bargains or simply dismissing charges and releasing repeat offenders, it would go a long way towards keeping innocent people safe from career criminals. 

[5-Points 3,838]

5 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

If he was discharged under that, then it would not have thrown any flags, by law.  I think only one or two types of discharges would have prevented him from purchasing guns and it they didn't use those ones.   If they thought he was crazy then they should have used the appropriate discharge but they didn't and so he was able to buy guns.  I'm not sure if that's on the Army or if they had their hands tied on what they could discharge him with.  In any event, what the commanders and other service members thought about him is irrelevant if they didn't use the appropriate discharge.  By law, he was legally able to purchase them.

Well it should have. I mean, how focked up do you have to be to get kicked out of the Army for being mental?

It's not like they booted him for having ADHD. They felt he was a danger either to himself or others. That's exactly the type of thing that NICS should pick up on if it's reported accurately. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 4,340]

7 minutes ago, 5-Points said:

Well it should have. I mean, how focked up do you have to be to get kicked out of the Army for being mental?

It's not like they booted him for having ADHD. They felt he was a danger either to himself or others. That's exactly the type of thing that NICS should pick up on if it's reported accurately. 

Oh, I agree with you 100%, which I why I was suspecting that he may have had a sympathetic commanding officer who decided to discharge him with a type of discharge that wouldn't look bad like a dishonorable or section 8 would.  Or they could have had their hands tied and could only have discharged him with the one he got.  All we can do is assume at this point.

[5-Points 3,838]

7 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Oh, I agree with you 100%, which I why I was suspecting that he may have had a sympathetic commanding officer who decided to discharge him with a type of discharge that wouldn't look bad like a dishonorable or section 8 would.  Or they could have had their hands tied and could only have discharged him with the one he got.  All we can do is assume at this point.

If it was a sympathetic C.O. and he tried to do this guy a favor? Ooooff! 

 

[League Champion 1,926]

2 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

My kind of people

 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,012]

Wanna bet he was on psych meds? 

[League Champion 1,926]

3 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Wanna bet he was on psych meds? 

Mexican Tranny's on free Meds and fentanyl are going to kill all of us sooner or later. 

[Gepetto 1,467]

It doesn't matter if the guns are purchased legally or not.  It's illegal to murder people but that didn't stop him.  Pretty sure he or any of these whack jobs could purchase or obtain guns illegally when they're motivated to kill.

[Rosie O'Donnell 20]

It's a false flag.  The shooter was from Honduras and was recruited by the CIA.  Big news coming out tomorrow.  Biden is gonna be impeached. 

[League Champion 1,926]

I FRIGGIN KNEW IT

 

 

[GutterBoy 2,900]

12 minutes ago, League Champion said:

I FRIGGIN KNEW IT

 

 

A mass murderer praising another mass murderer, shocking.  We should get that manifesto released so maybe more people can praise her and be inspired for future killings.

[League Champion 1,926]

6 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

A mass murderer praising another mass murderer, shocking.  We should get that manifesto released so maybe more people can praise her and be inspired for future killings.

You both have something in common, you both love Trannies