Paranoid Gun-rights advocate ambushes 3 Pittsburg police officers

I do agree with you - the increase of violence because of jobs, etc. is very scary. And its hard to support the right to bear arms when you have more and more situations like this!

How many more massacres are we going to see - lunatics with guns - before the lawmakers in this country get off their butts and stop pandering to the gun lobby and the NRA and pass stronger gun control laws?!?!? This is so sad and disturbing to me.

This is the third time in as many weeks when a crazy person - WHO HAS GUNS - has massacred innocent people. The lunatic in Binghamton was described as "loving guns and hating America". Well, here he was in America, where he had his chance to get his hands on guns and used two of them to kill 13 people.

What difference will it make to hunters and people who keep spewing about the 2nd Amendment?! They'll be able to have their guns. Doing everything we can to keep freakin' assault rifles out of the hands of crazies will not limit some hunter's right to go out and do their thing.

This is insane.....and it's going to get worse.

On this subject: Pitchforks and Pistols

I know this is a touchy subject but when are people going to open their eyes!!! So many people should not have the RIGHT to own and handle guns. It's a hard time and people are getting more stressed and crazy and paranoid. The shootings as of recent are all people who should never have been able to have legally get guns.

From the nursing home shooting this is a direct quote from I think the guys sister

"He did have some violent tendencies from time to time," Griffin said. "I wouldn't put it past him. I hate to say it, but it is true."

As in, she wouldn't put past him going postal and shooting up a nursing home that was full of innocent people he didn't even know?!~?! And he had access to a gun...... Just terrifying.

The guy from the shooting in Buringham was defined as "gun obssessed". And now this next shooting of three police officers by another 'gun obssessed' individual, this is the most horrifying. People from a young age get obssessed with guns it seems, because they can.

I mean three shootings in a week, two shootings in 24 hours???? All potentially preventable........ none of these people were 'criminals' before had so without the ability to buy and 'obsess' over guns legally.

I can't even compose my thoughts right now because this disturbs and saddens me so so so so much. I can't understand supporting gun rights when over 20 innocent people have been meaninglessly killed by hand guns in the USA in the past week, by people who should never ever have been able to have them.


I don't understand why it can't be like in Canada. You have the 'right' to have a handgun. If it's registered, if you have it locked in a cabinet where it can't be easily accessed, and it's been certified etc. You can only have the gun in the car between your house and the closest target range. If you are caught outside this area you are severely charged. Basically if hand guns are your 'passion' you can still do it, but you have to really want it, it's expensive and you have to jump through a lot of hoops. So people who just have one for the sake of having one generally don't, and it is def. less of a tragic problem.

Apparently he was arguing with his mom about a dog peeing on the floor. She reported him an an unwanted party, and when she opened the door to the house he stood behind her and shot the officers. It is amazing the 'routine' things our officers respond to and how quickly they become so much more. It is scary and sobering, although I do still support gun rights (I am, however a Brady Bill supporter). As a dispatcher the safety of my officers is on my mind every minute that I work. It's frightening to think of how quickly something so 'routine' and go so bad.

I realize that those who see no reason why a law abiding, non-hunter would want to own a firearm won't change their minds. Those who are just scared to death of anything that can go "BANG" don't want anyone but the authorities to have them (which, IMO, is the most dangerous position to take). And yes, there definitely should be more enforcement of the laws already on the books. It always amazes me that people actually think that these people wouldn't go out and get guns illegally when it is most definitely ILLEGAL to kill people, and in this case, police officers. They obviously didn't care about that law, so why would they care about laws about acquiring firearms????

But the whole thing about Obama and "gun control" or confiscation, or frankly even total registration. Yes, he said that he "supports the Second Amendment", but yet he has been for every single gun control measure that has come before him in Illinois or in his very short term in the US Congress. And let's not forget that we do have the most liberal Congress ever in control right now, who are pushing legislation through left and right (but almost all left ), who do want severe restrictions on citizens' rights to bear arms. Thus far, regardless of his campaign promises (i.e. getting rid of pork and earmarks, when both big financial bills were full of them) he has signed everything that they send to him. Will he push for serious firearms restrictions? Not publicly. Will he sign legislation for such into law? I have no doubt that if it crosses his desk, he will sign it saying that Congress passed it and they have more direct contact with the people, therefore he's just carrying out what the people want.

In my view, right now there is a HUGE threat to the people's rights. It isn't Obama himself, but rather Congress. But he certainly won't stand in their way, and will sign the legislation into law. I'm certain he wouldn't veto a bill like that, regardless of what he said when he was trying to get elected.

ETA: Please don't refer to this freak as a "gun rights advocate." OK, yes, he was paranoid about someone taking his guns, but 99.9% of the actual gun-rights advocates out there are just as sickened and saddened by this nut's actions as any gun-control advocate. It's the same as when a PeTA breaks into a shelter or animal testing place and releases all the animals and they are touted as "animal welfare advocates". You know, "animal rights advocate" used to mean us, too, but because it has been associated with the extremists, i.e. PeTA, ALF, ELF, etc., we can no longer use that term.

You know that I'm not a gun advocate but I understand what you are saying here. The folks like you who own guns and treat them responsibly are not a problem and I would hate to see your ability to get guns for your sport become a problem because a few nuts have ruined things.

I also think you are right in saying that if they didn't have a problem killing a police officer they probably wouldn't have a problem getting an illegal gun.

My problem is that because US citizens have this right to bear arms, there are people out there getting guns that definitely should not even be allowed near a firearm. Perhaps the best fix is to do better background checks, have some kind of mental testing, more stringent rules about having weapons in the car unless you are on your way to a shooting range or hunting during hunting season.

I'm sure I don't know the answers but it's scary to see what is happening. Our Canadian criminals that are using guns get most of those guns from the US because they cannot get them here in Canada and that scares me as well.

I mentioned something similar to this in my post. I don't think that gun ownership should be outright banned..... no no. Even here in Canada gun enthusiasts, who enjoy using them for sport and targeting shooting, can buy registered and insured hand guns. But you do have to jump through a lot of hoops, have inspections, locked cabinets, a special fire arms license (requires taking a course, safety, how to handle, store, clean) etc. Therefore, for the most part only those that want guns for sport etc. and respect guns will go through the hoops and cost to have them.

I don't think that having it regulated is such a bad thing........ yes there will still be illegal firearms, but hopefully regimenting it will lead to less accidents and less un-fit people owning them. Just today in the news yet another american father, shot 5 of his kids in a trailer park after his wife left him. Somehow I doubt he would have had this handgun if he had to go through all the strict rules etc. to get it.

The laws in place now aren't enforced, stricter gun laws won't do anything to prevent someone from committing a crime with a gun.

The anti-gun crowd uses instances like this to try to paint all gun owners with the same broad brush. It's already been mentioned, but events like this also draw scorn us responsible gun owners. If things are that bad, off yourself, don't try to take out the whole neighborhood just because you lost your job.

IMO, this is more a statement on the how the rights of the mentally disturbed have take precendence over the safety of the public. We have mentally ill clients who can't be helped because they refuse it, and until they commit a crime, the authorities can do nothing.
One guy heard voices - he even went to the ER because he couldn't take it anymore. But, he answered the test questions correctly, and couldn't be admitted into the psych ward. So....he went out & tried to start forest fires
Over & over, I have heard families begging us/mental health/ the judge to do something, but until they commit a crime....and who knows what the crime will be or the identity of the victim(s)

What are the gun laws now in place and what part(s) of them are not being enforced? I would seriously like to read the US gun laws to better inform myself.

Saying they aren't enforced isn't completely accurate, not all of the guns laws, including federal gun laws in regards to trafficking are enforced, much less prosecuted. Most firearms violations are prosecuted at the lower levels (local jurisdictions). Stricter enforcement of the current federal statutes was something that both the Clinton and Bush administrations wanted to do. In all fairness, the federal government only has authority to go after gun trafficking or corrupt gun dealers- in other words they can enforce and prosecute for violations of interstate commerce.

Black market trafficking of guns is big business in the United States and the government, federal and state, are as about as effective in stopping that as they are in fighting the war on the drugs. A while back I read that out of the twenty-some major federal laws concerning guns, only a couple of them are enforced. That was a few years ago, though. Most of the prosecutions were for a violent crime being committed with a firearm, and for convicted felons in possession of a firearm.

I'm sure there are other areas where enforcement is lax, at best. Such as background checks. I don't see how new, more restrictive gun laws help to solve anything if the current laws aren't strictly enforced or even ignored.

Any laws passed in regards to gun legislation would still have to stand up in court if they are challenged as unconstitutional. The Supreme Court narrowly got it right with their ruling on the D.C. gun ban last year. The federal government can pass legislation governing the sale and federal background checks but they really don't have the authority, IMO, to legislate how a gun should be stored in the home, etc.

Speaking of paranoid, I give you the freak that shot up the civic center in New York.

Is there a location somewhere online that I could actually see and read the current gun laws in the US?

So very true. This is just the same as when there is a bad incident with an exotic pet owner. All are made to look bad and we have these people screaming for more stupid laws we do not need. We do not need any new guns laws. More laws will do nothing whatsoever, except hurt the responsible people. You can ban guns all you want, but the law breaker will still find a way to get a gun and use it. We need to enforce the regulations we already have, background checks etc, but even with that, if a person wants to break the law, they will do it no matter what.

Hey, another dispatcher on board Sadly, I just read that the dispatcher who took this call may have made a mistake? The dispatcher was told there were guns in the house, but did not relay that info to the responding officers? Anytime I have a domestic call like that, one of the first questions I ask, Are there any weapons in the house?? If so, where are they and where is the suspect. Does he/she have access to them? Then I relay all that information to my responding officers. Not sure if this would have changed the outcome of the call or not, because as a dispatcher, I can give the responding officers all the information and precautions I have, but it is up to them to follow their own safety measures as well. Sadly though, it seems these officers were not given the important information the needed.

There are some Federal laws, mainly the ones dealing with trafficking, fully-automatic regs (you have to practically give up your first-born, and the cost of having him, to get a Class A license to legally own a fully-automatic weapon), broad things like that. Most of the laws that deal with the day-to-day firearms regulations are controlled by the states.

So basically there really are no actual set-down laws (except the few Federal laws dealing with trafficking and fully-automatics) and each state more or less makes up their own regulations which are not generally enforced. Is that about right?

I don't know how well states enforce gun laws since they will vary so much from state to state. I'll try to find you a list of all twenty-some federal firearms regulations. I know a lot states vary in the size of magazines that can be legally owned or used with a certain type of firearms (such as nothing that can hold more than 10 rounds).

Federal firearms laws:
http://www.nraila.org/GunLaws/Federal/Read.aspx?id=63

Wikipedia has a good overview on US federal gun laws. It also has an article by state that has detailed tables (and often a fair amount of text) on individual state laws. As usual, go to the sources if you doubt the veracity of any particular statement.

It is not my impression that gun laws in the United States are poorly enforced, but I certainly could be wrong.

Thank you. I'll check out that overview but I would really like to see the actual gun laws from a federal websight so I'll pursue that avenue as well. I'm just very curious.

Excellent! thank you.

I applaud your willingness to become informed....more than most Americans I know, myself included

I can surely relate - in my area, there's a wave of backlash - people who know that the Obamaites are training and conniving with the Mexicans to take their jobs, run them out of their homes , make us all speak Spanish & worship Allah
Sadly, they over-react instead of becoming informed