The ISP are lying. At that time frame (just prior to the Wu-flu) they were taking around 8+ months to process a FOID card. With the Wu-flu, they were taking over a year. My son applied for his around that time and it took over 8 months to get his FOID card. By law, they're supposed to process FOID applications in 3 months, but since the current Governor got elected, there's been a general slowdown in processing for some reason...
shooting in chicago
- Thread starter oldbear1950
- Start date
The current mayor of Highland Park was very quick to say it was legally purchased, while at the same time stating that she did not know how it was purchased. Additionally, the perp's father ran against the current mayor in 2020. Might have had some extra weight when applying for the FOID and avoiding the current wait time, might not be connected at all.
Ok, apparently the police did catch the right guy, and now there is a confession. I was willing to give the situation the benefit of the doubt, but a confession does remove the doubt.
Hindsight is 20/20, always gives us a clear and accurate picture, right??
It does, but ONLY when ALL the details are taken into account, not just some of them, which is what many people are focusing on right now.
Points to consider,
The "perp" wasn't a perp, until he killed people.
he was over the legal age of adulthood (18) so he is legally responsible for his actions. No one else is.
Again, look at things in the context of what happened at the time, NOT what happened a couple years later.
He was not a perp, or a killer in 2019. He did make threats and the police checked them out and did not find anything that required legal action.
Therefore, he was not any kind of criminal, no laws had been broken, he was not a prohibited person, and entirely legal to possess a firearm under the state law. Being under 21 when he applied for his FOID card, he got his father to sign as his sponsor. What father wouldn't, if he believed his son was basically a good kid, who had been through a rough patch and had gotten over it?
I'm pretty sure he didn't say "hey dad, will you sign this, so I can murder innocent people in a couple years?"
I would not be too quick to blame his parents, they are also victims of his criminal acts. Not to the level of those shot and their families, of course, but his parents lives have been irrevocably altered for the worse, by what their ADULT son CHOSE to do.
I think the person to blame is the one who pulled the trigger and murdered people.
Hindsight is 20/20, always gives us a clear and accurate picture, right??
It does, but ONLY when ALL the details are taken into account, not just some of them, which is what many people are focusing on right now.
Points to consider,
The "perp" wasn't a perp, until he killed people.
he was over the legal age of adulthood (18) so he is legally responsible for his actions. No one else is.
Again, look at things in the context of what happened at the time, NOT what happened a couple years later.
He was not a perp, or a killer in 2019. He did make threats and the police checked them out and did not find anything that required legal action.
Therefore, he was not any kind of criminal, no laws had been broken, he was not a prohibited person, and entirely legal to possess a firearm under the state law. Being under 21 when he applied for his FOID card, he got his father to sign as his sponsor. What father wouldn't, if he believed his son was basically a good kid, who had been through a rough patch and had gotten over it?
I'm pretty sure he didn't say "hey dad, will you sign this, so I can murder innocent people in a couple years?"
I would not be too quick to blame his parents, they are also victims of his criminal acts. Not to the level of those shot and their families, of course, but his parents lives have been irrevocably altered for the worse, by what their ADULT son CHOSE to do.
I think the person to blame is the one who pulled the trigger and murdered people.
It gets a little frustrating to hear about these guys having been on the LE radar as often as we hear it, but you bring up some very valid points and concerns with red flag laws. I've struggled with some deployment related mental health issues to the point where I am going to be medically retiring some time in the next year or so, made no secret about seeking help. I sure don't think I should be a prohibited person and legally I'm not, but all it takes is one doctor with a different opinion.
603Country
New member
We need the death penalty for people like that guy, and not waiting 20 years to get it done. But…that won’t stop all of the whackos, but it would be a start.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
So you're saying the police didn't confiscate his knives in 2019, they stole them?44 AMP said:
The shooter apparently cased a synagogue:
"The thought did cross my mind that maybe he is just casing the place," said Marty Blumenthal, who works security for the synagogue and said he now thinks that's why the suspect was there.
"Now I do, now that I know he has homicidal tendencies for sure."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crim...pc=U531&cvid=e342f631d34a4dcb848a88dd15fce8d0
"The thought did cross my mind that maybe he is just casing the place," said Marty Blumenthal, who works security for the synagogue and said he now thinks that's why the suspect was there.
"Now I do, now that I know he has homicidal tendencies for sure."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crim...pc=U531&cvid=e342f631d34a4dcb848a88dd15fce8d0
From another article, sounds like the guards were on top of their game when he showed up. Pretty good guess as to why he chose a softer target.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...bby-Crimo-sized-local-synagogue-Passover.html
Onward Allusion
New member
Not that this makes a difference to those here but the weapon used was a S&W M&P 15. The MSM will keeping pushing the AR narrative. 
Nope. Not saying that the police stole them. But here's the unanswered questions, what became of the knives???
Police often, and sometimes are required to remove knives, guns, and other "dangerous" items from a household (no matter WHO in the house owns them) while they determine what the situation actually is.
OK, so the police took the knives, THEN what happened?? They decided he was not an immediate threat requiring legal action. Since he was not deemed a credible threat at the time, the police should have returned the property taken (in this case, knives). Did they??
Sometimes (and especially with small, and low $ value items) the police won't return them, automatically, you have to ASK. Did he ask for their return? Did he ask and get them back? Did he ask and was refused? Did he not bother to ask so the police just kept them???
Making a point about them confiscating knives, without telling the rest of the story isn't fair & balanced recounting of a situation.
Get stopped for a traffic issue while carrying? What usually happens, the cop "confiscates" your pistol ("for their own safety, for the duration of the stop) and then returns it when you are free to go.
If you only tell PART of the story, ("the cops took my pistol when I got stopped") and don't tell anyone that you got it back afterwards, you are intentionally creating a false impression.
I believe that meets the technical definition of a "lie".
It's done all the time, but that doesn't make it right, or honest.
My point here isn't to defend the killer, or anyone else's judgement involved in the situation, not the family, not the cops who essentially cleared him in 2019, or anyone else. My point is that whether its professional news people, or just regular folks, repeating only part of what happened distorts and can even prevent an accurate understanding of what happened.
SO without knowing the whole story, how valid can one's judgement about it, actually be??
this guy has confessed to killing innocent people, because he felt like it. If anyone deserves to be permanently removed from existence, I believe he should be.
The firearm used is reported to be a S&W MP-15. There has been no reporting on any gun control laws (not clear at this point if it was in violation of the local "assault weapon ban" or not, but since no one is yet saying it was, it's possible it wasn't) being broken.
What we appear to have is a legal gun, purchased legally and then later used to commit mass murder. I think the reason why it was used and how the killer could/should have been identified and stopped before becoming a killer are not very well firearms related topics. Do we really need to go farther on this, here, in this forum?
Feel free to have a different opinion.
1. The perps father and/or mother called police twice:
a. In April after the perp threatened to off himself.
b. In September after the perp threatened to kill his family.
2. The police confiscated the knives which were later returned to the father.
3. The police had no case because the father and/or mother refused to press the issue.
4. In December the father endorsed the perps application for a FOID card.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/h...sedgntp&cvid=07be6216b7014bffb9fe2cf69e1de25f
a. In April after the perp threatened to off himself.
b. In September after the perp threatened to kill his family.
2. The police confiscated the knives which were later returned to the father.
3. The police had no case because the father and/or mother refused to press the issue.
4. In December the father endorsed the perps application for a FOID card.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/h...sedgntp&cvid=07be6216b7014bffb9fe2cf69e1de25f
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Ya know ... if my son had just threatened to kill me and my wife, and the police had just confiscated multiple knives from him, I don't think two months later I would sponsor the kid for a permission slip to buy GUNS!
Makes you wonder who's nuttier, the son or the father.
Makes you wonder who's nuttier, the son or the father.
A lot of people have a huge "blind spot" when it comes to close family, believing, or hoping for the best even when there is solid evidence it won't be so.
One of my wife's cousins almost lost her home and did some jail time because of her POS little brother, a career thief and small time dope dealer, who got her in trouble dealing dope from her house when she wasn't there.
I made it clear, years before that he was not welcome at my home or anywhere on my property, but he was "her little brother" and she would not refuse him her home. She paid for that, but even afterwards, would not turn him away.
She's gone now, and last I heard, is long term landlord (the state) did let him attend her funeral. As far as I'm concerned, he's not welcome at my home as long as he draws breath, and I won't let him be buried here, either.
I'm sure the father agreed to sponsor him believing he was now on a good path. Turned out he was as wrong as wrong gets, and he'll be paying for that mistake the rest of his life, and I'm not talking about mere money...
One of my wife's cousins almost lost her home and did some jail time because of her POS little brother, a career thief and small time dope dealer, who got her in trouble dealing dope from her house when she wasn't there.
I made it clear, years before that he was not welcome at my home or anywhere on my property, but he was "her little brother" and she would not refuse him her home. She paid for that, but even afterwards, would not turn him away.
She's gone now, and last I heard, is long term landlord (the state) did let him attend her funeral. As far as I'm concerned, he's not welcome at my home as long as he draws breath, and I won't let him be buried here, either.
I'm sure the father agreed to sponsor him believing he was now on a good path. Turned out he was as wrong as wrong gets, and he'll be paying for that mistake the rest of his life, and I'm not talking about mere money...
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Too true. It cost the Sandy Hook shooter's mother her life. (As well as 27 other people's lives.)44 AMP said:
Looking at the IL red flag law, from a quick explainer article at a lawyer's website, it seems even if the kid was red-flagged, it wouldn't have been much of a deterrent even if the local police department was diligent enough to follow through.
Some law enforcement does stay on top of these issues and you get to see the good and bad of aggressive anti-gun politicians there. The Crook County sheriff, Tom Dart, is quite aggressive in blocking FOID and CCW applications for any reason, even for long expunged cases. In IL, this is referred to as being "Darted".
Some law enforcement does stay on top of these issues and you get to see the good and bad of aggressive anti-gun politicians there. The Crook County sheriff, Tom Dart, is quite aggressive in blocking FOID and CCW applications for any reason, even for long expunged cases. In IL, this is referred to as being "Darted".
Some thoughts that came upon me as I pondered weak and weary of this entire mess,,,(first being that the tapping wasn't a raven, but a hungry cat...)
anyway, I got to wondering, if we aren't falling (have fallen) into the trap of creating a foolishly unrealistic and unachievable goal when it comes to stopping the violence before it happens.
A rather vocal segment of the country is operating on the "you knew, or should have known" premise, and blaming the violence on just about everything and everyone, except the person who actually did it.
HOW in hell are we, as a society, expected to be able to know, and somehow prevent these things, when the people doing them are so often able to prevent their parents and other people close to them from realizing what they are going to do?
And, in those cases where they actually tell us what they intend to do (or hint at it) BEFORE going on a murder spree, generally, no one believes they are serious. Why do you think that is??
My other point (this time) is about the tremendous increase in "mass shootings". An article I read today said that before 2000, there were about 3 mass shootings a year, and in the first six months of 2022, there were over 240.
I am not trying to argue that the huge increase isn't a real thing, what I am wondering about is how much of the increase is due to more shootings, and how much is due to the ONE factor not being talked about, which is how a mass shooting is classified.
For a long time, the standard was based on a certain number of people killed. The standard the press is using today is (and they will tell you, they aren't trying to hide it) 4 (four) people shot or killed, not including the killer. Take a look at that, specifically "shot or killed".
Think that change in the standard might inflate the numbers, compared to how we counted things in the past? I do.
Puts me in mind of what happened some years back, when the number of "obese" people in the country virtually doubled overnight. We didn't magically get fatter instantly, but the numbers did. Because the medical community and the insurance people who use the same tables, changed the boundary of what constituted "obese" and a huge number of people who had been classed as "overweight" were reclassified as "obese".
Result? we no longer had an "obesity problem" we had a "HUGE obesity problem".
TO be clear, I am not saying we do not have a huge increase in violence and shootings over the past, what I am saying is that I think a part of that statistical increase is because of the way we have changed our definitions from what we used in the past, and that no one seems to be mentioning that.
Seems that artificially inflating the numbers by the way we count them should be something considered. Is it the sole reason? hell no, but it is, I think, ONE of the reasons the numbers are so much higher than they were.
anyway, I got to wondering, if we aren't falling (have fallen) into the trap of creating a foolishly unrealistic and unachievable goal when it comes to stopping the violence before it happens.
A rather vocal segment of the country is operating on the "you knew, or should have known" premise, and blaming the violence on just about everything and everyone, except the person who actually did it.
HOW in hell are we, as a society, expected to be able to know, and somehow prevent these things, when the people doing them are so often able to prevent their parents and other people close to them from realizing what they are going to do?
And, in those cases where they actually tell us what they intend to do (or hint at it) BEFORE going on a murder spree, generally, no one believes they are serious. Why do you think that is??
My other point (this time) is about the tremendous increase in "mass shootings". An article I read today said that before 2000, there were about 3 mass shootings a year, and in the first six months of 2022, there were over 240.
I am not trying to argue that the huge increase isn't a real thing, what I am wondering about is how much of the increase is due to more shootings, and how much is due to the ONE factor not being talked about, which is how a mass shooting is classified.
For a long time, the standard was based on a certain number of people killed. The standard the press is using today is (and they will tell you, they aren't trying to hide it) 4 (four) people shot or killed, not including the killer. Take a look at that, specifically "shot or killed".
Think that change in the standard might inflate the numbers, compared to how we counted things in the past? I do.
Puts me in mind of what happened some years back, when the number of "obese" people in the country virtually doubled overnight. We didn't magically get fatter instantly, but the numbers did. Because the medical community and the insurance people who use the same tables, changed the boundary of what constituted "obese" and a huge number of people who had been classed as "overweight" were reclassified as "obese".
Result? we no longer had an "obesity problem" we had a "HUGE obesity problem".
TO be clear, I am not saying we do not have a huge increase in violence and shootings over the past, what I am saying is that I think a part of that statistical increase is because of the way we have changed our definitions from what we used in the past, and that no one seems to be mentioning that.
Seems that artificially inflating the numbers by the way we count them should be something considered. Is it the sole reason? hell no, but it is, I think, ONE of the reasons the numbers are so much higher than they were.
All of us who had male children MAY have had one who is a problem-the solution would be to become involved, by any means necessary in the goings on in the child's day and who and what he does with his free time. If all of the fathers did that, we would not have such nonsense as a older teen wanting to do stupid stuff, never mind murder.
There, I've described the perfect parent-all who qualify step forward for the award.
I don't have an award.
There, I've described the perfect parent-all who qualify step forward for the award.
I don't have an award.
Weapon used (allegedly)
All I have is a youtube posting. It claims the weapon was a Kel-Tec Sub 2000.
I have no experience with them. It looks like a blowback pistol caliber carbine that is hinged to fold in half.
That does not help anything but it SHOULD be useful to counter the anti-AR-15 misinformation /propaganda.
https://youtu.be/G80JPDX8q_E
Another interesting thought. Laura Ingraham/ Fox news presented the idea studies are linking marijuana induced psychosis to the mass shootings.
Going clear back to Columbine , nearly all the shooters were long term marijuana users.
I know,correlation/causation. Maybe the all ate french fries,too.
And tobacco companies had research/science that smoking is harmless.
I'm skeptical of the pot advocates who knee jerk dismiss any suggestion that prolonged pot use COULD be harmful.
I have observed a few heavy pot users succumb to (what I would call) schizophrenia. It IS a thing.
Its easier to blame guns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update: I have since been told the S+W M+P 15 was supposedly found on the roof with 223 brass. The Kel-Tec was supposedly recovered from the car.
All I have is a youtube posting. It claims the weapon was a Kel-Tec Sub 2000.
I have no experience with them. It looks like a blowback pistol caliber carbine that is hinged to fold in half.
That does not help anything but it SHOULD be useful to counter the anti-AR-15 misinformation /propaganda.
https://youtu.be/G80JPDX8q_E
Another interesting thought. Laura Ingraham/ Fox news presented the idea studies are linking marijuana induced psychosis to the mass shootings.
Going clear back to Columbine , nearly all the shooters were long term marijuana users.
I know,correlation/causation. Maybe the all ate french fries,too.
And tobacco companies had research/science that smoking is harmless.
I'm skeptical of the pot advocates who knee jerk dismiss any suggestion that prolonged pot use COULD be harmful.
I have observed a few heavy pot users succumb to (what I would call) schizophrenia. It IS a thing.
Its easier to blame guns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update: I have since been told the S+W M+P 15 was supposedly found on the roof with 223 brass. The Kel-Tec was supposedly recovered from the car.
Last edited: