Now we already knew about Florida and what kind of breeding ground it is down there, but here's the best part of the story.18-year-old David Penney of St. Cloud, Florida is an angry young man. According to police Penney left a six-page letter expressing rage at the world and himself, dressed in military fatigues, combat boots, a tactical vest for carrying multiple ammunition magazines, picked up two AK-47s, more than 100 rounds of ammunition and drove to a friend's home. He was upset over a car crash that had damaged his vehicle in September. Penney stood in the street and emptied several 30-round magazines into the home. Fortunately, no one was injured.
Police soon arrived on the scene and Penney started shooting at the officers. Both of the officers sustained injuries, one was shot in the foot, the other was hit in the face with flying glass when a round came through the windshield. But according to the St. Cloud police chief, the quick actions on the part of his officers forced Penney to retreat and ultimately, he shot himself.
Penney shot himself in the chin and was listed in critical condition at a local hospital but he is expected to survive.
According to police, Penney owned the guns legally and has no criminal record. It is legal under federal law and Florida state law for an 18-year-old to purchase an AK-47. There is no licensing requirement, no registration requirement, nor is there a waiting period.
Please leave a comment.
And just how would your proposals have prevented this? He had no criminal record. The only way to prevent such would be to ban guns. There's nothing special about the civilian legal version of the AK-47. All guns would have to be banned to stop a shooting like this. That solution is extreme and won't work here.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, how often does this happen? Run the numbers: In a country of more than 300,000,000, how many such shootings occur in a year? As a percentage of the total population or even as a percentage of gun owners, this is rare.
The band on the wagon can go out for coffee now.
This just in: yesterday many thousands of similar gun owners did nothing of the sort.
ReplyDeleteFatWhiteMan,
ReplyDeleteCheers! I've gone all day without shooting anyone. It's astonishing, but true.
On the question of Florida's gun laws, I say that they're decent. The state has preemption over towns; it issues licenses to anyone who is qualified (including me), and it seems that acne isn't held against anyone buying a gun.
ReplyDeleteFatWhiteMan:
ReplyDelete"This just in: yesterday many thousands of similar gun owners did nothing of the sort.
December 3, 2011 10:03 PM"
Or they simply didn't make the news.
Greg Camp:
You really should be wearing a cheerleader's uniform and waving pom-poms. You're just as sick as some of the guys who never come here anymore (except of course, they do, they just won't admit it) who think that teh gunz ARE the problem solver. Oh. btw, you're just as dishonest, too.
Get used to it. More massacres, every day, as gunsel gunwacks get more guns. We will see more school shootings. People will ask "Why?"
ReplyDelete"Why?" is the moron question. The real question is "How?" And "How?" is "high powered ordinance, with the caliber higher than the IQ of the most intelligent gunsel gunwack".
FatWhiteMan said...
ReplyDeleteThis just in: yesterday many thousands of similar gun owners did nothing of the sort.
But some did. Not all of them shot at strangers, but clearly from the news sources we post here daily, many gun owners do commit gun violence, it is committed every day in every state.
Whereas NO non-gun owners, no one who doesn't have a gun fetish belief that it gives them some sort of power shot anyone.
Do some people find other ways to go off the deep end, to harm people? Yes. But the firearm is a uniquely deadly weapon compared to other weapons, and it lends itself to impulse use in a way which other weapons do not. It also provides a potential for use at a greater distance than most other weapons provide, and a speed and ease of hitting multiple targets that other weapons do not have.
Democommie,
ReplyDeleteI'm going to keep challenging you until you answer me: In what way was I dishonest? You've called me a liar. Now, prove it.
POed Lib,
If you were right, this country would have no one left alive, given all the guns that we have. I'm pleased to say that you're wrong. I'm also pleased to say that you will not get my guns, no matter how much you whine about it.
Dog Gone,
Yes, you post articles here, many of them about criminals using guns, some of them about legitimate uses of guns in self defense, even though you disparage those. What you and others fail to note is that the number of gun crimes is tiny in comparison to the number of guns. You claim to love numbers, but you ignore those.
What is going on with the gunwacks and their incessant paranoid psychosis about safety is that more and more have guns. This means, inevitably, that more lunatics get guns. And since gunwacks REFUSE to allow ANY restrictions, we get more and more crazy people. It is not the vast majority, but it is the extremes. And the gunwack NRA irresponsible moron culture, the Gun Show Loophole, the NRA main interest in selling guns without any controls means that more and more and more and more massacres will occur.
ReplyDeleteI myself am never so amused as when some gunwack gets bushwacked by his/her own kid. Now that's funny thing. Those that live by the gun will die by the gun.
POed Lib,
ReplyDeleteRather than tossing out invective, why don't you address the point that I made? There are some 100,000,000 gun owners in this country (1/3 of the population) and hundreds of millions of guns. If guns are as bad as you claim, why aren't we all dead? Short of that, why don't we see a huge increase in mass shootings and in gun crimes in general? The numbers have been falling year by year. If you were correct, we should see a steep rise in the rate of gun crimes.
Given all of that, I don't see how we're the ones who are delusional about guns.
What continually annoys me beyond all measure is that we are, right now, stuck in this paranoid fantasy of the gunsel gunwacks. I have no objection to hunting or trapping or target shooting or any of that stuff. What we DO NOT NEED in this society is concealed carry. Concealed carry leads to increased crime, an escalation of gun ownership where EVERYONE in certain areas is carrying, and more lunatic NRA gunwacks telling us how unsafe we are.
ReplyDeleteWe are not unsafe, and all of the NRA gunwacks in the world telling me how unsafe we are does not make us unsafe. It merely demonstrates that the NRA member is basically a paranoid lunatic.
This morning, we woke up to the news that a local university president had spent the night in jail because he carried a firearm from SD to NY. The laws are different and this paranoid gunwack did not bother to learn anything. I am calling the university, which is a CHRISTIAN college, that he owes the community an apology.
We need fewer guns and fewer gunwacks.
Address your point? What point? My point, which you and all the gunsels ignore, is that the policy of the NRA GUARANTEES more lunatics. Since no NRA member will consider any of a dozen common-sense safety measures, I will continue to call you lunatics nuts.
ReplyDeleteHere are several
1) Eliminate all quick-change magazines. THese allowed the VTU guy to kill 32 people instead of 6.
2) Waiting periods on purchase of guns and ammo.
3) Limits on purchases.
4) Elimination of the gun-show loophole.
5) Elimination of ALL kits to convert semi- to full-auto.
These are all common-sense, and yet the gunsels will consider none of them. Until we get some compromise, I will continue to call all NRA members paranoid wacks.
POed Lib,
ReplyDeleteSo again, you avoid what I asked you. Perhaps you'd care to support your assertion that concealed carry leads to increased crime. I call bullshit. Prove it. Show me that licensees commit crimes with their guns in any quantity that is statistically significant.
Regarding the university president, I haven't read the story, but if true, it illustrates what's wrong with New York's laws. We do need fewer laws like that.
By the way, POed Lib, we're not impressed with the way in which Dashiell Hammett has led you on a wild goose chase.
ReplyDeletePOed Lib,
ReplyDeleteLook up what gunsel actually means before you use it again.
Let's talk about your idiotic proposals:
1. What the hell is a quick-change magazine? Most semiautomatic pistols have magazines that drop free when the user presses the release. You want we should have to use a skate key?
2. What exactly is the point of a waiting period? If I'm itching to kill someone, do you think that I'll tell the person to get a cup of coffee while I run out to the gun store?
3. What limits on purchases? How about the limit that my bank account imposes? Is that enough for you?
4. There is no gun-show loophole. Transactions between private citizens are legal in most states. Doing those at a gun show is just a convenience.
5. Such things are already illegal, if they even exist. To be sure, a skilled machinist might be able to make a firearm fully automatic, but it's not the kind of thing that an average stoner in his basement could manage. But let's say that anyone can buy a kit and hey presto! make a full auto firearm. Doing so is a Federal offense.
What do we see here? You can't answer my objection, and when pressed, you toss out scary notions about what we gun owners might do and propose a lot of silly legislation to deal with it.
Greg just likes to run at the keyboard and show us he has no idea of what he's talking about.
ReplyDeleteNothing can be done about gun violence--forget it.
Let's just give guns to criminals and lunatics--why bother with trying to stop them?
Greg, knowing how ignorant you are--I await the day when your name makes it to the newswires for being a stupid concealed carring gun owner who did something stupid and landed in the shit.
ReplyDeleteFrom reading your rubbish, I know that day is coming--it's just a matter of when.
Then, we can point to you as an example of why Shall Issue is wrong.
Laci the Dog,
ReplyDeleteSince when do you speak for POed Lib? That's as may be. I note that you didn't address any of the points that I made. You just tossed out your usual blanket statements about me. By the way, don't await my arrest with too much anticipation. I follow the law. I follow it better than you are aware, since you've demonstrated that you know nothing about the gun laws of Arkansas.
You have not yet explained to us how you were qualified to carry a concealed handgun, nor have you explained what justification you had for doing so. If Dog Gone is going to use you as an example of doing things correctly, you ought to address those questions.
I follow it better than you are aware, since you've demonstrated that you know nothing about the gun laws of Arkansas.
ReplyDeleteI have never been asked to give an opinion about the gun laws of Arkansas.
Since I am not licenced to practice, and have not practised in Arkansas, I am unable to give any proper legal opinion on those laws.
Greg, you are the only person who likes to show the world how ignorant you are.
Unlike you, Greg, I prefer not to make comments which have no rational basis, or basis in facts.
ReplyDeleteI prefer to not offer opinions where I am ignorant.
Unlike you.
Greg Camp:
ReplyDeleteLemmeesee, "Blue sky"? do those two words conjure up anything that you might have said that was, well, a fucking lie?
Let me know when that comment on another thread becomes "true", THEN we can work on something else.
There are too many, Greg. I don't give a fuck if you divide by all the stars in the galaxy. There are too many.
ReplyDeleteAnd something could be done about it which wouldn't interfere with your fantasy of protecting yourself. But you won't hear of it. Why?
"And just how would your proposals have prevented this?"
It's not fair to ask what would have prevented a specific act. But the comprehensive gun control program which I've outlined would leave you armed and prevent many such incidents as this.
Still you won't have it.
Mikeb302000,
ReplyDeleteYou're correct in this: No deals! No compromises! We don't trust your side. Unless that changes, there will be no deals.
Democommie,
Blue sky? What are you talking about?
Greg Camp:
ReplyDelete"Democommie,
Blue sky? What are you talking about?
December 5, 2011 4:35 PM"
Best not get in running for political offices. You can't even remember the lies you told last week.
Mikeb302000:
"It's not fair to ask what would have prevented a specific act. But the comprehensive gun control program which I've outlined would leave you armed and prevent many such incidents as this.
Still you won't have it."
I'm afraid that it's become fairly obvious from his comments that Greg Camp will never submit to the government's laws if they attempt to regulate his penisubstituteinanimateobect. He is ready to break any law that he disagrees with.
Democommie,
ReplyDeleteI recall that Dog Gone yammered on about wavelengths, telling the world what the rest of us already know. What specifically do you think I lied about?
Greg Camp:
ReplyDeleteYou're no longer even entertaining with your indignoarance.
Democommie,
ReplyDeleteAnd you never offer any proof that I've lied. Specific proof--don't have it? What, you make the accusation, then put the burden on me to show myself innocent?
Show me where I have made a statement that I know to be false. Or shut up. Preferably the second.
Greg Camp:
ReplyDeleteYou know where you made the statement about the blue sky. Either that or your memory is as faulty as your logic.
Greg - I know you know that I know you know what I know I am talking about - you know?
ReplyDeleteDemocommie,
ReplyDeleteIt's the end of the semester, so I've been plowing through a pile of essays. If you'd care to remind me, I'll be happy to answer any objection you have. Otherwise, I have work to do.
Jim,
ReplyDeleteUm, it's like, ya know. . .
Democommie,
ReplyDeleteI looked up the comment. I said that adding the adverb "highly" to explosive is akin to calling the sky "really blue." I said that it was an example of sensationalism and bad writing. That was a judgement, not a statement of fact. I was assessing the nature of the language. How can that be seen as a lie? A lie is a statement that the speaker or writer knows to be contrary to the facts.
Now that you've had your free English lesson for the day, would you mind not calling me a liar unless you're going to back that up?
Oh, poor Greg, him being picked on.
ReplyDeleteThis:
"My complaint about the news article was not that it declared the sky to be blue. It shouted that the sky is a really bright blue, and oh, by the way, IT'S FALLING!"
IS what you said.
You like to make comments about things as if you are the sole individual who has any idea about how various things work. You're not.
Your comments about the writer of the news story being wrong are well, wrong. The author of the news story was not conducting a class or writing a technical paper. Your original complaint (one that was completely without basis) was that the writer incorrectly identified gunpowder as a "high explosive". The writer did not do such a thing. That fact was pointed out to you by both me and dog gone. Your reaction was to double down on teh burnin' stoopit.
You are not the arbiter of usage of the english language, that is for goddamned sure.
And, sadly for you, you are a liar.
Get back to grading your papers.
My impression, democommie, is that Greg is probably teaching remedial English to the junior college not-high-achiever crowd, the ones who didn't learn an adequate mastery that would be expected K-12, and have to come back for retraining in the fundamentals.
ReplyDeleteI don't get the impression he is accustomed to dealing with others in writing, so he has slipped into some bad habits criticizing others writing and thinking.
What troubles me is that he does so incorrectly, so what is he teaching those junior college remedial students?
greg likes to shoot his mouth off even if he only thinks he has some idea of what he is talking about, which he usually doesn't.
ReplyDeleteHe may know the difference between lay and lie, but not much else.
Education doesn't really mean very much unless you can use it to think--"educatingto the test" produces people who can take tests, but not much else.
Of course, another trend in the US is disgust for expertise, which can be coupled with trusting those with poor expertise in a subject.
I can't imagine that he has too much of a work load, as he can come here and comment.
But, that doesn't take much brain power for Greg since he doesn't put much thought into what he says.
Laci the Dog and Dog Gone,
ReplyDeleteActually, I've long been an opponent of teaching to the test and of any system that encourages such methods. No Child Left Behind is an abomination and strikes me as an attempt to kill public education.
When it comes to my teaching ability, to my knowledge, you've never taken a class from me, nor have you been a part of any faculty evalution process with regard to me. That being said, you're just passing wind.