1 dead, 4 critically injured in office shooting; possible suspect in custody

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  sister-mary-agnes-ample-bottom  •  one week ago  •  68 comments

By:   MSN

1 dead, 4 critically injured in office shooting; possible suspect in custody
There were six victims at a Thursday afternoon shooting at an office in Bryan, Texas, just outside of College Station, officials said.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Six people were shot, with one killed, Thursday afternoon at a cabinet-making business in Bryan, Texas, just outside of College Station, officials said. A Department of Public Safety officer was also shot while apprehending the suspect.

1 dead, 4 critically injured in Texas office shooting: Police ABC News

Four people were critically injured in the shooting at Kent Moore Cabinets and taken to St. Joseph Health Regional Hospital, Bryan Police Department Chief Eric Buske said. Another person was shot and taken to the hospital with non-critical injuries.

One victim was pronounced dead at the scene.

Bryan police said they believe the suspect is in custody. The person in custody is an employee of the company, Buske said.

The suspect had fled the location when Bryan police arrived shortly after 2:30 p.m. local time. He was taken into custody in Grimes County, Sheriff Donald Sowell told ABC News.

A Department of Public Safety officer was shot when taking the person into custody. He is in serious, but stable condition, the DPS said.

© KTRK One person was killed and four were critically injured in a shooting at Kent Moore Cabinets in Bryan, Texas, on April 8, 2021.

A seventh individual was taken to the hospital after suffering an asthma attack.

"Officers responded, they found several victims, and they were checking the area, check the building looking for more victims," Bryan Police Department Lt. Jason James said in a brief presser. "This is a fluid event still so we're still trying to get some more information."

The FBI said in a statement it was "aware of the incident that occurred today in Bryan," but the Bryan Police Department is leading the investigation. The Houston Field Division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is also responding.

© Travis L. Brown/The Eagle via Twitter Police investigate the scene of a shooting in Bryan, Texas, April 8, 2021.

"I have been working closely with the Texas Department of Public Safety and the Texas Rangers as they assist local law enforcement on a swift response to this criminal act," Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said in a statement. "Their efforts led to the arrest of the shooting suspect. The state will assist in any way needed to help prosecute the suspect."

"[Abbott's wife] Cecilia and I are praying for the victims and their families and for the law enforcement officer injured while apprehending the suspect," he added.

Just hours earlier, Abbott had criticized President Joe Biden's new executive actions aimed at gun reform.

"Biden is threatening our 2nd Amendment rights. He just announced a new liberal power grab to take away our guns," he tweeted. "We will NOT allow this in TX."

ABC News' Abby Shalawylo and Gina Sunseri contributed to this report.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
1  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom    one week ago

Just another normal and well-balanced gun-owning individual going full-blown bananas at work.   

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
PhD Guide
1.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1    one week ago

In another shooting, a doctor, his wife, 2 grandchildren, and a handyman were all gunned down.  Another person is in critical condition.  The shooter in a typical cowardly move, killed himself.

[Abbott's wife] Cecilia and I are praying for the victims and their families and for the law enforcement officer injured

Governor, your prayers are worthless as are you.

 
 
 
shona1
Freshman Participates
1.1.1  shona1  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1    one week ago

And another in Texas 6 dead on 06/04/21...“Apparently two brothers made an agreement to commit suicide and ended up taking the entire family with them,”.They concluded that Farhan had teamed up with his older brother Tanvir to kill the rest of their family and then themselves..What is wrong with people???..

 
 
 
Texan1211
PhD Principal
1.1.2  Texan1211  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1    one week ago

yeah the Governor had lots to do with crazies killing people.

smh

 
 
 
Ronin2
Senior Quiet
1.1.3  Ronin2  replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.2    6 days ago

You know that guns kill people. The people pulling the trigger never factor into it. They would all be normal well adjusted individuals, and not threats to society, if it weren't for evil guns.

 
 
 
Texan1211
PhD Principal
1.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Ronin2 @1.1.3    6 days ago

Sometimes it seems like it is everything BUT the shooter's fault!

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
1.1.5  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Texan1211 @1.1.4    6 days ago

OR, they chase the wrong implement that actual crimes are committed with the most, its simply getting a foot in the door so to speak to implement total illegalization of firearms .

 if they can get one they can say after a ban fails to do whats intended that the next in line has to be banned , and so on and so on. once a law is on the books it rarely goes away in entirety.

 It follows the idea of go for the low hanging fruit , even if that low hanging fruit is not responsable for the majority of the problem and is being shined by the media narative, the piece that will affect the least and the others will sacrifice that small portion to keep their own since theirs isnt defined or affected . their ox isnt getting gored so control advocates feel others will stay uninterested and throw the minority of firearms owners under the bus it would affect..

 
 
 
Ender
PhD Principal
1.1.6  Ender  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @1.1.5    6 days ago

Never happen with the Heller decision. Which by the way, also said that guns can be regulated.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
1.1.7  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Ender @1.1.6    6 days ago

Ender im simply following the history of gun control and how it has worked in this country.

 NFA 34 went after full autos and short barreled long guns(shotguns and rifles) , suppressors , it got passed because only a small segment of society even had them let alone could afford them .

I have read that in the late 50s and very early 60s , both society and the legislature were in fact in favor of banning handguns , which brings us to the GCA 68, where a ban on handguns was almost impossible to pass by majority . The 68 act was a compromise to get the cheaply made handguns off the streets , those that cost about 10 to 20 bucks and could be thrown away, the compromise was the federal form we now fill out and the creation of the prohibited persons section on that form. what changed between 59 and 68 where legislation had a somewhat 50/50 chance of passing  a handgun ban to being defeated? My answer is society and the actions of the 60s drained away support because of social unrest.

going after handguns continued from 68 to about mid to late 80s , and tactics of controllers changed  they started going after a smaller segment of firearms that they figured because they were owned by so few , people who owned guns wouldnt care since they didnt own them

. My answer as to why was in the intrim , more and more people started buying handguns , for sport and self protection, it became a lot harder to push gun control when the minority became the majority , now those people were affected and they didnt like it .

The 94 AWB was also a compromise it legislated certain firearms as banned , but it grandfathered and did not restrict their sale of existing firearms of the class banned , it also gave a written definition of the class with what made a firearm an AW, people simply looked at the list of things that made a firearm an AW and left of insignificant parts or features in the definition and the firearm was "Ban compliant" could be sold and owned with no fear of violating the law . at the time the AR was not exactly a "popular" item that was flying off gun sellers shelves , low hanging fruit that had a small segment of buyers .

 The compromise part was the increase of funding for both police and social services in the overall omnibus bill that the ban was apart of . another compromise was the sunsetting provision , if it couldnt be proven to have done what it was suppose to do after 10 years , the law /ban went away.

 and society had a lot to do with its going away as well.

 and we see it now with the AR pistol , the president has called on DOJ and BATFE to re examine their rules and definitions to see what can be changed to make such illegal under NFA 34, it would only affect about ( from estimates i have seen ) about 3-4 million gun owners that would either have to surrender a firearm they paid starting at $700 and the price going up, or get a federal lic and pay a federal NFA tax stamp of $200 to own the firearm.

 i already posted a simple and cheap counter to that , rebarrel to a non NFA compliant barrel ( only has to be 16 inches long) replacement barrels start around $90, or simply purchase a new upper that is NFA compliant ( ( uppers dont need a BGC and start at about $200 if one shops around ) all perfectly legal.

I think biden was right when he said it was a matter of timing when it comes to gun control , and currently , with the way society is and the direction society is pushing public service entities , MHO is the timing sucks to get anything passed .

 
 
 
Ender
PhD Principal
1.1.8  Ender  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @1.1.7    6 days ago

They could still never implement a full ban. Would never happen, the SC would strike it down.

There is a reason people don't have cannons, machine guns or rocket launchers.

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
1.1.9  expatingb  replied to  Ender @1.1.8    6 days ago
There is a reason people don't have cannons, machine guns or rocket launchers.

People have cannons.

People have machine guns.

People have tanks.

I'm not sure about rocket launchers, but you can buy one if you really want it.  Don't expect to find the rockets to use it with though.

 
 
 
Ender
PhD Principal
1.1.10  Ender  replied to  expatingb @1.1.9    6 days ago

I stand corrected.

I just found out my brother has a small cannon that they use during reenactments.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
1.1.11  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Ender @1.1.8    6 days ago

cannons are legal to own , what isnt is the explosive ammunition , that requires a special lic 

"Machine guns" AKA full auto firearms are also legal to own , they require a special lic and are highly regulated and expensive to own and have to conform with current law , such as it has to have been made prior to 1986 , a law passed and signed by republican president  ron reagan , dammit saint reagan was a gun grabber....

 you can own a launch tube , its the ammo that will need the lic and ammo is expensive .

 there are always ways around things if one wants to invest the time and money to do so.

 up to and including nuclear material.....the government even has a lic for that.

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
1.1.12  expatingb  replied to  Ender @1.1.10    6 days ago
I stand corrected. I just found out my brother has a small cannon that they use during reenactments.

The vast majority of people have no idea that those items are available to the people.  

If the mileage wasn't as bad as it is, I would consider a tank if I had to commute in the DC area again.  You sure as hell wouldn't have to worry about someone trying to intimidate you on the road!!  jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

When the wife and I return stateside this summer, we'll only be in the DC area for a very short time, then we'll head to Texas for her retirement tour location, after visiting with my kids and grandkids from my late first wife.   

 
 
 
Ender
PhD Principal
1.1.13  Ender  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @1.1.11    6 days ago

Thus regulated.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
1.1.14  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Ender @1.1.13    6 days ago

agreed , and when it comes to "gun control " its a discussion of how much regulation is enough for the average person . 

there is where lies the divide.

 
 
 
Ender
PhD Principal
1.1.15  Ender  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @1.1.14    6 days ago

I don't think the divide is as wide as some make it out to be.

Most people agree with common sense regulation.

It is just that the extreme gets the most attention.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Sophomore Principal
1.1.16  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  expatingb @1.1.12    6 days ago
I would consider a tank if I had to commute in the DC area again.

I believe, but I could be wrong, that tanks are considered too wide to operate on roads; moreover, the treads would tear up said roads.

 
 
 
Ender
PhD Principal
1.1.17  Ender  replied to  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka) @1.1.16    6 days ago

Which is why they wouldn't let donald have tanks in his parade.

Would have torn up the streets in DC.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
1.1.18  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka) @1.1.16    6 days ago

LOL its more of a weight thing really the weight alone would destroy the road surface , they do make tracks that have rubber inserts for hard pavement , but those suck in field conditions . they work , but they suck . and actually our current interstate system , was conceived with 2 purposes in mind , commerce and military movement if needed, had nothing to do with the average driver though they benefit from its existance , ever see a really long and wide stretch of highway in the middle of no where? alternate landing site for planes such as bombers and fighters.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Sophomore Principal
1.1.19  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @1.1.18    6 days ago

Good to know. I was unaware. I know they're heavy, but I don't know about tanks enough to say that's the reason they would tear up the roads. Only military trucks I know a lot about ar HMMWVs.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
1.1.20  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka) @1.1.19    6 days ago

quick search says a fully loaded and fueled tank can weigh between 60 and 70 short tons , almost double what a semi can weigh to haul legally without overweight permits.

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
1.1.21  expatingb  replied to  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka) @1.1.16    6 days ago
I believe, but I could be wrong, that tanks are considered too wide to operate on roads; moreover, the treads would tear up said roads.

Actually, they're not all that much wider than what is on the road now.  Granted when hauled by a 'heavy hauler', the treads hang over the edge of the trailer by a few inches, but a good driver could definitely keep it between the lines of a highway.

As Mark noted in 1.1.18, you need to remember that the "interstate" system was originally conceived by Dwight D. Eisenhower as primarily a means to move military equipment around the country and coast to coast quickly.  The 'civilian' use of that road network was an afterthought.

Now, had they kept up with the weight increases of military equipment over the years, and made sure contractors guaranteed their work for "X" number of years in lieu of the general one year "workmanship" we would have interstate and other major roadways that lasted for years, even decades as they do in most of Europe as opposed to needing major repairs in a couple of years.

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Sophomore Principal
1.1.22  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  expatingb @1.1.21    3 days ago

Now, had they kept up with the weight increases of military equipment over the years, and made sure contractors guaranteed their work for "X" number of years in lieu of the general one year "workmanship" we would have interstate and other major roadways that lasted for years, even decades as they do in most of Europe as opposed to needing major repairs in a couple of years.

But that would mean that there wouldn't be government money yearly for road repairs. s/  jrSmiley_82_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
PhD Guide
1.1.23  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  shona1 @1.1.1    3 days ago

Here, a mother killed her 3 young children, fled, carjacked someone, and wrecked the stolen car.  She will probably play the postpartum depression card.  I say lock her up, throw away the key, and then throw away the cell.

 
 
 
shona1
Freshman Participates
2  shona1    one week ago

Morning. Almost becoming an everyday occurrence over there now..Very sad when people think their first choice is grab a gun and shoot people...Certainly something drastically wrong with people's way of thinking...

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3  Buzz of the Orient    6 days ago

Another day in America, more people shot to death, it's the daily news and it's getting boring as hell - what would really be NEWS is a day in America when NOBODY gets shot. That would call for a celebration.

Taking note that it's almost universal that the family of persons charged with shooting others say that they had a mental illness of some kind, what is REALLY scary in the USA where so many people have guns is this...

Over a third of COVID-19 survivors experience a neurological or mental-health condition in the 6 months after infection, a large-scale study finds

health /news/...

1 day ago · One in three  people  with  COVID-19 had  neurological or  mental health  conditions in the six months following  illness  in a new study. Anxiety and mood disorders were the most common following  COVID-19 .
 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    6 days ago

President Biden just said that in America over 300 people are shot every day, more than 100 of whom die.  What the fuck is the matter with you people?  Americans have the chutzpah to criticize other countries?  

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Masters Participates
3.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.1    6 days ago
President Biden just said that in America over 300 people are shot every day, more than 100 of whom die.  What the fuck is the matter with you people?  Americans have the chutzpah to criticize other countries?  
Do you have a link to the source of that statement?
How much of that number is attributed to minority on minority shootings?
How many people does the Chinese government kill on a typical day?

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.1.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Greg Jones @3.1.1    6 days ago

I watched Biden's address to survivors of shooting victims at the White House on the CTV (Canadian Television News) web site today in which he gave the exact numbers of 316 poeple being shot and 106 of them dying per day.  You can access CTV news on the internet and watch the news broadcast yourself or else it surely was covered by American TV if Canada could show it. .  

China isn't the topic.  How many Americans has Trump killed with his negligent handling of the Covid-19 virus?

Since you posted everything as quotations, what are your sources for your last 3 paragraphs?  Obviously I'm the source for your first one.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.1.3  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.1.2    6 days ago

Biden Takes First Gun Control Actions - The New York Times

1 day ago · [applause] Every day in this country,   316 people   are   shot   every single day —   106   of them die every day. Today, I asked the Justice Department to publish a model red flag legislation. So states ...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.1.2    6 days ago
"China isn't the topic.  How many Americans has Trump killed with his negligent handling of the Covid-19 virus?"

Funny how others keep bringing that up.  Deflection, projection, and denial is all they know.  

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.1.5  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.4    5 days ago

The art of deflection, perfected by Trump, is copycatted by his sheep as an ignorant way to change the subject.

 
 
 
321steve - realistically thinkin or Duu
Sophomore Principal
3.2  321steve - realistically thinkin or Duu   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    6 days ago
they had a mental illness

That is what wrong with "You people"  Buzz in America mental illness is still looked down on and carries a stigma. 

Not to mention mentally ill people seldom recognize that they need help and are even less likely to seek help if they do recognize they have a problem because of the stigma.

America has always had gun laws that protect citizens owning guns. It's part of the countries protection against enemy invasion.

Those laws are set in our history and many never want those laws changed. 

But mental illness is still not really addresses either. So sadly we have mass murders here on a regular bases.

Stupid, yes, Unfixable, maybe. But sadly that is our America of today.

With little mental health help and little gun control. I look for this to continue.  

 
 
 
r.t..b...
Masters Participates
3.2.1  r.t..b...  replied to  321steve - realistically thinkin or Duu @3.2    6 days ago

Well said.

It is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

No one will take away my rights, and a pox on any constraints on my 2nd Amendment rights, and by extension, ignoring any realistic effort to ameliorate the daily death counts.

As long as I can carry, regardless of the carnage, I can call myself a patriot.(lowercase intended)

 
 
 
Texan1211
PhD Principal
3.2.2  Texan1211  replied to  r.t..b... @3.2.1    6 days ago

And what specifically would you do to prevent mass murders?

While sticking to the US Constitution?

 
 
 
r.t..b...
Masters Participates
3.2.3  r.t..b...  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.2    6 days ago

Reinstate the ban on assault weapons.

Expand the requirements of purchasing any firearm: a thorough background check, mandatory training contingent to any purchase, and the enactment of a national registry of the manufacturers and sellers of any firearm. 

We should make the purchasing and owning of a potentially lethal weapon a much more serious endeavor than casting a ballot. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
PhD Principal
3.2.4  Texan1211  replied to  r.t..b... @3.2.3    6 days ago

Some good ideas.

What do we do about all of the existing guns, especially the assault weapons?

 
 
 
Ronin2
Senior Quiet
3.2.5  Ronin2  replied to  r.t..b... @3.2.3    6 days ago
We should make the purchasing and owning of a potentially lethal weapon a much more serious endeavor than casting a ballot. 

You think it isn't already?

I forwarded this to my friends that have concealed weapons permits. They needed a good laugh. 

If you follow the laws purchasing a fire arm is far more difficult than casting a ballot. Unfortunately criminals seldom follow the law.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
Masters Participates
3.2.6  r.t..b...  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.4    6 days ago

Grandfather them in.

No confiscation and allow a period before enactment for those who feel the need to purchase them to do so before the ban is enacted.

The ownership of guns is part of our birthright, but that does not mean we cannot nor should not make adjustments as necessary by addressing the incontrovertible facts. Preserving the inherent rights while simultaneously protecting the citizenry... a rather logical win win if not for the all the bloviating. 

 
 
 
r.t..b...
Masters Participates
3.2.7  r.t..b...  replied to  Ronin2 @3.2.5    6 days ago

Can you cast a ballot at a 24/7 Walmart?

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
3.2.8  expatingb  replied to  321steve - realistically thinkin or Duu @3.2    6 days ago
But mental illness is still not really addresses either.

Mental illness had been addressed when we had dedicated mental institutions.   Unfortunately, like all good things there was some abuse in a couple and the self indulgent people with no idea of any alternatives pushed to close those institutions.  And the self indulgent idiots patted themselves on the back and the institutions closed.

Most failed to understand and very likely never did, that those places were as much for the safety and protection of the residents as they were for the general population.

Now, in lieu if having controlled locations, feeding, clothing, housing and yes, medicating some to help with their illness or to ensure they were incapable of harming themselves or others, we have them creating homeless drug and violence infested "camps" in almost all large and small cities across America.

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
3.2.9  expatingb  replied to  r.t..b... @3.2.6    6 days ago
Preserving the inherent rights while simultaneously protecting the citizenry... a rather logical win win if not for the all the bloviating. 

Why not try that old concept of actually enforcing existing laws before writing new laws that will be ignored?   

Unfortunately, the vast majority of felons caught by police with illegally owned/obtained weapons have those charges dropped in exchange for a plea deal to a grossly lesser charge.  Weapons charges for felons gets the fed involved and they sure as hell don't want to do time i n a federal prison, so they cop to the lesser charge to avoid that.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
Masters Participates
3.2.10  r.t..b...  replied to  expatingb @3.2.9    6 days ago

So as in all things, rather than acknowledge the obvious problem; if it be the gun conundrum, the dilemma on our border, the need for policing reform, addressing our scientifically confirmed effect on the climate, ad infinitum...let’s just continue to talk about it in politically expedient terms rather than doing the hard work of talking to it..and kick the can down the road for our children to deal with, as with continue to demonstrate neither the ability nor the will to accept the responsibility..

Tiresome does not begin to describe the frustration of our inability to come to terms with that simple realization. 

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.2.11  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Ronin2 @3.2.5    6 days ago

was going to say i have never had to pass a BGC or wait 3-10 days to vote.....but i should stay quiet , that just might happen in the future....

 
 
 
MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)
Sophomore Principal
3.2.12  MsAubrey (aka Ahyoka)  replied to  Ronin2 @3.2.5    6 days ago

If you follow the laws purchasing a fire arm is far more difficult than casting a ballot. Unfortunately criminals seldom follow the law.

Agreed. As a CPL holder myself, I have no issues with background checks on every firearm. It's not the law-abiding citizens going around murdering people en-masse either though.

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
3.2.13  expatingb  replied to  r.t..b... @3.2.10    6 days ago
So as in all things, rather than acknowledge the obvious problem; if it be the gun conundrum, the dilemma on our border, the need for policing reform, addressing our scientifically confirmed effect on the climate, ad infinitum...let’s just continue to talk about it in politically expedient terms rather than doing the hard work of talking to it..and kick the can down the road for our children to deal with, as with continue to demonstrate neither the ability nor the will to accept the responsibility..

Kick it down the road?  How dare you.  I told you to ENFORCE the 20+ thousand gun laws currently in existence, and you speak to me of 'kicking the can down the road'.  Pot meet kettle and thy name is initials.....

I always admit that there is a problem, but I will also acknowledge that there is no law that will, and never has stopped an individual from committing an act of violence.   The only possible means to accomplish that would be to forcibly confiscate every gun from every home in the country, and melt them down.  BUT, here's the kicker, that would not accomplish your hope of a violence free world.   Guns would simply become the new drug smuggled into the country and we know just how effective we are at controlling drugs being smuggled in.  There are after all not 80+ thousand people killed in this country by illegal drugs now is there?

Tiresome does not begin to describe the frustration of our inability to come to terms with that simple realization. 

Tiresome come from people like yourself that continually rail for more laws before considering enforcing current laws.  I will give you the benefit of the doubt and allow you to make a correction now.  

Provide guidance as to exactly what YOU would do to eliminate gun violence.  NOT what "they" should do, not what you "think" might work, not what you "wish" things were like, but specifically what YOU would do right now, today.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
Masters Participates
3.2.14  r.t..b...  replied to  expatingb @3.2.13    6 days ago

What would do is as meaningless as your demand.
What I have done and will continue to do is contact my representatives and express my concern, study and understand the ballot measures and candidates and vote accordingly, and never shy away from expressing my opinion that we have a serious problem and it needs to be addressed. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.2.15  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.4    6 days ago
"What do we do about all of the existing guns, especially the assault weapons?" 

It's too late, there's nothing you can do about it now.  That's why I made my sarcastic tongue-in-cheek suggestion to give a gun and ammunition to every American 12 and over to protect themselves, which you took seriously.  It's the same philosophy which your favourite leader applied to dealing with the Covid-19 virus when it first appeared in the USA - i.e. don't take it seriously, delay, kick it down the road and maybe your grandchildren will deal with it.  

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Principal
3.2.16  Hal A. Lujah  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.4    5 days ago

Nothing unconstitutional about a buy back initiative.  Nows probably a good time for it, since people could use the money more than the fetish.  

Buy Back Better.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Sophomore Participates
3.2.17  Snuffy  replied to  r.t..b... @3.2.7    5 days ago
Can you cast a ballot at a 24/7 Walmart?

Isn't this part of the complaint about the Georgia law where drop boxes will be moved inside state offices and only accessible during business hours rather than on the streets and available 24x7 during early voting?

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.2.18  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Hal A. Lujah @3.2.16    5 days ago

I agree , nothing unconstitutional if the government wants to jump into the commercial market and buy things .

i always chuckle at the name though , how does the government buy back something that they never owned in the first place? i suppose it could be called a buy back if the firearm in question was once US property and sold as surplus . that would mean only 4 firearms i have owned in my lifetime  would fall under that catagory , and only 2 of the 4 would fall under a semi auto catagory and of those 2 only 1 would be classified as an AW under the  94 ban ( even then it wasnt an AW under that ban either).

So who sets the price paid?  seller or buyer? will the price be current fair market value as under eminent domain? can the seller say the price is what they have invested and cost them? or will the government set the price they pay at what they pay for bulk contract price or less?

 thats not even mentioning if the item to be purchased is for sale from the individual that has it.

 
 
 
expatingb
Freshman Quiet
3.3  expatingb  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    6 days ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
4  Tessylo    6 days ago

Deflection, projection, and denial is the name of the game for certain folks.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
4.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Tessylo @4    6 days ago

The pointing to others, the blaming and criticizing other nations with different cultures is the only way some Americans have to answer for their own childish misbehaviour.  American babies have rattles and teddy bears, American grownups have their favourite toys as well - guns. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
4.1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @4.1    5 days ago

And toys for children too.

.

Texas infant fatally shot by 3-year-old brother: police

Guns, guns, America's favourite toy

The more guns that you have 

The more lives you can destroy.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
4.1.2  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @4.1.1    5 days ago

I was just thinking that maybe some children's stories should be rewritten to modernize them, bring them up to date for American children, now that they are using guns.

Little White Riding Hood  (Would not want to mistake her for a "commie", eh?)

"Grandma, what big eyes you have."

"The better to take aim at you, my dear."

"Grandma, what a big gun you have."  (an AR15?)

"The better to shoot you with, my dear."

The Three Little Pigs

"I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your house down."      BANG

"Who's afraid of the big bad wolf, the big bad wolf, the big bad wolf,

Who's afraid of the big bad wolf, now that we're armed to the teeth."

Mary Had A Little Lamb

Mary had a little lamb, its fleece was white as snow

And everywhere that Mary went the lamb was sure to go

But Mary's father shot the lamb and cooked it real slow

The mutton stew was very good,  there was no thought of woe.

Itsy Bitsy Spider

The itsy bitsy spider went up the water spout

Down came the rain and washed the spider out

A man then shot the spider into itsy bitsy pieces

Then gave spider shooting lessons to his little nieces.. 

Bambi

The hunters shoot Bambi's mother, then they shoot Bambi.  End of Story.

 
 
 
JBB
PhD Principal
4.1.3  JBB  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @4.1.2    5 days ago

The times do change. When I was a little kid, Little Black Sambo was the popular children's book and Sambo's was the popular restaurant. Sambo's, by the way, would neither admit nor serve black Americans. Sometimes changes come for the betterment of all mankind!

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
PhD Guide
4.1.4  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JBB @4.1.3    5 days ago

Sambo was not black.  He was an Indian (India), hence the tiger in his story.  I used to see blacks served all of the time at the Sambo's near my parents house (1970's)

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.1.5  Trout Giggles  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @4.1.2    2 days ago

You really should try your hand at writing children's stories. I'm impressed

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
4.1.6  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.1.5    2 days ago

LOL.  Never thought of it, but hey, maybe I could.

 
 
 
Texan1211
PhD Principal
4.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  JBB @4.1.3    2 days ago
Sambo's, by the way, would neither admit nor serve black Americans.

Why do you just make this stuff up?

What exactly inspired you to tell such a false tale?

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
5  Buzz of the Orient    2 days ago

I was thinking about posting an article wherein I would do a running list of the latest daily shootings and gun murders in the USA, adding a new comment every day with the latest list, but then I decided that it would take up much too much of my time - I might not even have time to eat my meals.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
5.1  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5    2 days ago

that would have been a herculean task Buzz done for absolutely nothing.

reason i say it would be for nothing is there will always invariably be someone like myself that will delve a little deeper than just shear numbers .

some would ask how will things be catagorized ? separating things like suicide , from criminal activity , from justifiable self defense be the person a civilian( non LEO) or someone in LEO, or simply accidents ?

how about catagorizing types of fireams used ? rifle , shotgun , or handgun? some might be surprised what the real major type of firearm used is .

And that is not even counting that things would have to be updated and revised daily after investigations come in.

 i can go on and on , but i know it will fall on deaf ears no matter whom i am talking to.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
5.1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @5.1    2 days ago

I didn't read your comment with deaf ears - because you're right.  I could never accomplish such a task.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
5.1.2  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5.1.1    2 days ago

The "deaf ears " part was not meant to offend , it is just a fact of life that once someone has a set outcome in mind , it is very difficult to introduce facts to change it  so if someone is steadfast in what they believe , the best i can attempt is an understanding of why i think the way i do. i simply understand we wont agree on the subject and move on.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
5.1.3  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @5.1.2    2 days ago

I wasn't offended, Mark.  I know it wasn't aimed specifically at me, and besides, I know that what I had even suggested was ridiculous.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
5.1.4  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5.1.3    2 days ago

not ridiculous if one wants to get to the root/ base causes of a problem IMHO.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

JohnRussell
devangelical
Tessylo
Kavika
r.t..b...
Hallux
Sunshine


49 visitors