Several people shot at church in Sutherland Springs, Texas

[NKBJ]

I found it disturbing that the only way I could connect the dots in a way they would line up in a sensible order was to develop my own custom conspiracy theory. In the end, as far as I am concerned, the matter was settled by an INGO member who knew one of the Sandy Hook families personally. That said, when the official story can't be tortured into a sensible narrative, that practically begs for alternative ideas.

When theories start to be presented about something I always ask whether it appears the intent is to derail inquiries into whodunnit. There's been so much of that technique exercised over the last few decades that it's become SOP, to be expected.

 

[jamil]

I see now. At first glance, I thought you starred out "twitter".

Not a lot of difference IMHO.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Not a lot of difference IMHO.

Good point.

 

[Alamo]

Judge rules Air Force responsible for 2017 mass shooting at Texas church | TheHill

A federal judge on Tuesday ruled that the U.S. Air Force is mostly responsible for the 2017 mass shooting in Sutherland Springs, Texas, due to its failure to enter the gunman's criminal history into a federal background check database, which might have prevented him from purchasing firearms.

 

[BigRed]

Judge rules Air Force responsible for 2017 mass shooting at Texas church | TheHill

Surely the mass media will be all over this announcement.



I will not hold my breath.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Judge rules Air Force responsible for 2017 mass shooting at Texas church | TheHill

Seems like that's the correct decision. I mean, what's the point of all these laws already on the books if they're not going to be enforced by those responsible for doing so? (Which is pretty much what the pro-2A community has been saying all along.)

 

[jamil]

Seems like that's the correct decision. I mean, what's the point of all these laws already on the books if they're not going to be enforced by those responsible for doing so? (Which is pretty much what the pro-2A community has been saying all along.)

Agreed, but a lingering question, would it have really made a difference? There are other ways than legal to get firearms.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Agreed, but a lingering question, would it have really made a difference? There are other ways than legal to get firearms.

That's also true, which is also what pro-2A people have been saying all along. I'm just wondering what Big Red would have to say about all of this. I'd probably agree with him.

 

[Ark]

Agreed, but a lingering question, would it have really made a difference? There are other ways than legal to get firearms.

Particularly in Texas, and for a killer whose behavior indicated a high level of motivation.

However, of all the parties in this event, the Air Force is the one that most compellingly breached their duty of care by failing to report the discharge as required. I disagree with the judge's childlike faith that a NICS denial alone would have stopped this crime, but the Air Force did have a duty of care and did fail to uphold it, and is therefore liable for at least some percentage of the harm.

 

[BigRed]

BigRed would say gun laws do absolutely nothing to stop an evil person from performing evil deeds. They simply hinder the ability of the good person to protect his loved ones, his property, and his self.

Through this, gun laws empower the evil one and weaken the good one.

I am glad Willeford was there and willing to do what was needed to stop the murderous rampage of that evil piece of **** that gave not a damn about life, let alone a law.