Meet Second Amendment Rights fan Brady Oestrike.Likes: OathKeepers, the AR-15 Gunowners of America, MI Coalition for Responsible Gunowners, the NRA, renaissance fairs and various gun and ammo suppliers and "militias."
Dislikes: President Obama, unions, anti-gun folks.
What a catch! Did I miss anything?
Oh, yeah.....
A pregnant teenager and her boyfriend, 25, were both killed, after connecting with the wrong man for a sexual encounter through Craigslist. Brady Oestrike, who had a large collection of assault rifles, allegedly strangled 18 year old Brooke Slocum and decapitated Charles Oppenneer. Slocum, who was eight months pregnant, was allegedly held captive before he death.According to the AP, "It's likely that Oppenneer died of some kind of head trauma, but that couldn't be determined without his head being found, police said."Oestrike shot himself to death after crashing his car in an attempted escape from police.
So this guy who owns weapons apparently didn't use them except to kill himself. Yep, makes perfect sense to me. You forgot to include that he's a union member, he must be very conflicted since you believe him to be someone who also dislikes them.
ReplyDeleteGosh, ssg, what strange logic. So, to recap--you have a guy who decides to kill 2-3 people--on some weird whim. But it's ok because he didn't use his guns?
DeleteHmmm.
Gunloons such as yourself illustrate my point. You don't believe any mental illness or sick proclivity should disqualify anyone from fondling guns.
Never said it was ok Jade, just not seeing how owning something that doesn't seem to have been used in the crimes (that we know of) has any bearing on the crimes committed.
DeleteWe also haven't seen anything along the lines of anything that might have disqualified him from purchasing the firearms that he didn't use to commit the crimes written of. There was mention of violence in an earlier relationship, but the victim decided not to press charges.
And if there had been a conviction for something that disqualified him from gun ownership, the only difference would be a long trial and a much longer prison sentence instead of a short drive to the morgue.
For me, what it has to do with is the false claim by gun rights fanatics that gun owners are polite and responsible. So often they're not, and this is a good example of that.
DeleteYou guys love to pretend that it's only gang members and drug dealers doing wrong with guns. That's not so, which we point out daily on this blog. But, even worse is the violence that does take place among the inner city gangs and other criminals taints you lawful gun owners as well since you are the source of their guns.
The guy is a gun loon killer. Of course you would like to distance him from yourself, but his resume sounds similar to yours.
DeleteObviously not a very good one since the only person he killed with a gun was himself. We don't seem to have much in common since the only sword I own is made of wood, and I'm not a union member.
DeleteNope, ssg, the similarities are eerie.
DeleteAs are "Jadegold"s similarities to recently departed trolls.
DeleteSpeaking of similarities..........................
DeleteIt has been the lingering suspicion of many who frequent this site that "Jadegold" is in fact, a habitual serial troll who proliferates a wide range of aliases which spout many bizarre and often contradictory rantings. It appears that "Jade" has often argued with these aliases under his usual alias, "Jadegold", or has otherwise engaged in a dialogue with himself through other sockpuppets conversing among themselves. Many have suspected that another suspected internet troll, "Greg Camp", who has only recently withdrawn from what many suspect to be trolling, to also be yet another alias of the suck puppet progenitor which birthed "Jadegold" which begs the question of whether "Greg Camp" and "Jadegold" are one in the same.
Only an idiot or a liar could make such an argument. Neither Jadegold nor Greg Camp are trolls.
DeleteIt would be a very elaborate ruse of little consequence since Greg has his own blog. So not seeing it.
DeleteAnother issue concerns the fact that friends, family, and coworkers certainly knew there was something wrong with Oestrike.
ReplyDeleteThese types of stories all have the usual timeline: at, first, everybody is "shocked" and remembered the gunloons as quiet/polite/ordinary/etc. But after some time, it will emerge that family, friends, coworkers knew there was something bad wrong. I will guarantee Oestrike's gunloon buddies knew it and did nothing.
Upon examination of the (common) anti-self defence arguments, one finds an amusing pattern with relation to the aforementioned "reasoning" and those who spout such a flatulently asinine system of belief;
DeleteSimple minds seek simple answers.
Now (assuming that you have the cognitive ability to appropriately respond without the simian references to penile display that typify the arguments of your "side", respond to the following,
How does one find patters in the abject depravity of violence (whether armed or unarmed) and why should society respond to the actions of a madman.
"why should society respond to the actions of a madman" Really? Is that a serious question?
Delete"Simple minds seek simple answers."
DeleteYou mean like the proper response to gun violence is more guns?
MB,
DeleteThe deranged are, by nature, unpredictable. The society ceases to function in a civilized order when it begins to form itself around (the actions of) a divergent minority. Put quite bluntly by fmr Home Secretary Leon Brittan, “You cannot legislate against the acts of a madman,”.
Jadegold,
Have I suggested the increased production of arms, or a government program or charity devoted to arming greater portions of society as an appropriate public response to armed felons? Where have I said ANYTHING previously which equates an increased arms production to (presumably) a lower crime rate?
I have only implied that society is most troubled by what it is most powerless against, and will thus fail to stop madmen by means of civilian disarmament, while creating many other social ills in the course of pursuing such an abjectly fruitless goal.
The despot stands nakedly powerless before an unmoved world.
It should be harder for the deranged to get guns, not easier. What could be more obvious than that.
DeleteThis is perhaps the most diabolically asinine statement that the anti-self defence bullhorn armed bigots have used to purport their perverse goals.
DeleteOf course no one wants a violent offender to arm themselves with anything, much less a firearm, but to extrapolate this into a legitimisation of a restrictive public policy which, by nature, is impotent against the determined lunatic, even with the most prohibitive measures undertaken as an affront to the rights of the public.
A can of petrol in the hands of someone who is inclined to do harm, may be equally as dangerous as a firearm or any other potentially dangerous object in the same hands. Firearms are commonplace, but by far not the most ardently destructive means by which a deranged person would inflict mayhem.
You can't prevent violence any more than you can prevent cancer, Alzheimer's or Lou Gehrig's disease. It is a natural result of the human condition. The world sucks and it is WAY bigger than you. Get used to it.
Here's the flaw in your analysis. Proper gun control laws would indeed be "impotent against the determined lunatic,"but not all those who misuse guns are "determined." Many others are not "lunatics." Those who are both determined and lunatic would always find a way to do damage, but disarming even them is the smart move. The death toll in mass shootings would go way down.
DeleteI'm afraid there's no escaping the fact that proper gun control saves lives. I realize you probably don't really give a fuck about that as long as you're not personally inconvenienced, but there it is.
actually, the headless guy may have been shot too, no?
ReplyDeleteAnother wackadoodle gunsuck. There are a huge number of sick gunsucks in this country, and they all have guns. The NRA wants everyone to have a gun. Thus, there will be huge numbers of massacres in the future.
ReplyDelete