Gun battle in Stockton, hostages shot

Bart Noir

New member
I searched and didn't see that anybody had started a thread about this. Gun battle is the only way to describe this. Using a hostage as a shield until she is dead is sickening.

1st link about battle

2nd link

So the photo shows an AK-47 style rifle with the stock removed, and a 30-round magazine in place. Reports were that the three killers had more than one such weapon, but initial reports just might be wrong.

So here is the living and dying proof about criminals having what they want for firearms. The California gun laws achieved nothing.

Bart Noir
 
The argument from the antigun folks is that gun control laws didn't go far enough as there is leakage from other states, even after the laws were passed and the existing stocks supplied criminal demand.

Thus, the solution is absolute national bans and confiscations. While not removing all guns from criminals, it would reduce the stocks and reduce crime.

Heard this debate at the American Society for Criminology.

Gun folks say - see laws do nothing.
Antigun folks say - the laws were not strict enough.

So cases like this mean one thing for the choir and another for the antigun choir.
 
Clearly a tragedy, but I'm waiting for the hostage autopsy and more independent data to form an opinion.
 
Thus, the solution is absolute national bans and confiscations. While not removing all guns from criminals, it would reduce the stocks and reduce crime.
That one's been around since the late 1980's. It used to be applied to handguns when banning those was the agenda. Then assault weapons were invented in 1989, and it was applied to those.

I'm sure we'll hear from Sarah Brady and Shannon Watts on this pretty soon.
 
I see the gunmen really paid attention to the CA gun laws! :eek:

I live in Bay Area of CA (not born here; came here in 2001 -job) and Stockton would be the last place I would expect a bank robbery!
 
So many unanswered questions. It will be interesting to see the details if they ever get released. Another bout of panic buying and political maneuvering is sure to be under way as well.
 
Given the world is going down the toilet, I don't think a case like this will generate any new uproar.

The news cycle will be full of immigrants, Russia/Crimea/shootdown, Middle East, the weather.

For police - we have choke holds and beat downs that have more media legs.
 
So, the Chicago gang shootings will stop if we ban guns in Peoria and Bozeman?

That question will get a totally blank look from the gun control folks.
 
Thoughts and prayers for the victims and their families. From what I've read and seen so far it looks like a few high losers watched "Heat" too many times. I don't know how you can legislate a way around that.
 
Glenn E. Meyer said:
Gun folks say - see laws do nothing.
Antigun folks say - the laws were not strict enough.

So cases like this mean one thing for the choir and another for the antigun choir.

True, but the real fly in the antigun ointment is that if these guns placed an area at higher risk for crime (which would be the case if stricter laws protected people), then one would see such crimes happen at a higher rate in places with more lax laws.

But let's face it, that bunch isn't all that big on analyzing flaws in their arguments.

Nasty situation in Stockton though. My thoughts go out to the families of the victims. Awful, awful stuff. But it wasn't the rifles that put this idea into the heads of those criminals (yeah, I know I'm preaching to the choir here).
 
Given the world is going down the toilet, I don't think a case like this will generate any new uproar.

The news cycle will be full of immigrants, Russia/Crimea/shootdown, Middle East, the weather.

For police - we have choke holds and beat downs that have more media legs.

True enough. International violence probably gets better ratings than local violence, regardless of how overblown either are. I've not seen anything else about it yet, so I'm not too worried about it.
 
Back
Top