LAX Shooter Passed NICS Background Check, Bought Gun Legally By Robert Farago on November 3, 2013 “A federal law enforcement official said that the Smith & Wesson assault rifle used in the attack is believed to have been purchased legally from a Los Angeles-area arms dealer,” usatoday.com reports. So . . . how’s that background check thing working out for you? Of course you know what this means: California legislators will redouble their efforts to pass an assault weapons ban. Because you can’t stop crazy people from buying the guns legally. (Go figure.) If Paul Ciancia modified the AR-15′s bullet button (ya think?) boom! Bullet button ban bill full speed ahead. Meanwhile, here at Bergstrom Airport there’s not a gun in sight at the security checkpoint. Sadly, not one concealed either (i.e. mine). Not that it’s all about me, but you know what I’m saying.
This slippery slope is going beyond guns. In Virginia if you are busted for DUI you can still drive but you have to install a breathalyzer lockout on the ignition. Although I can't figure out why we should still let them drive, if we are going to let them drive, then the breath lockout is better than nothing. Here is the problem: I was talking to someone at work the other day about this and they told me that every car should have a breathalyzer lock just to make sure people don't dive drunk. I tried to point out the fact that I do not drink alcohol and neither does my wife, so my cars will never be driven by a drunk driver. The person I was talking to said it didn't matter because as long as I was not drunk it wouldn't effect me. This is the problem with the entire thought process of the people in this country, they actually believe the government not only can, but but should have the responsibility to protect them from all the evils of this world, and that liberty is much less important than security. What's next, take away my drivers license because drunk drivers kill people, and as long as I can drive I am a risk to others? Where does it stop? The guy at LAX did what he did because he was mentally ill, not because he could buy a gun. Just like the drunk in the car, not matter what he has to do to start the car he is still a drunk, and a nut that can't buy a gun could do as much damage with a gallon of gas and a yard sprayer. I know I am preaching to the choir, but I had to vent. We have an election here tomorrow and the future of the Commonwealth is at stake.
Hmmm... What doe's someone say to this?? California, same oh same oh.. Somethings never change.. Well, there they go again.. Good post BT...
I just heard a news story on the radio that the Attorney General thinks that arming the TSA might be a good idea. This is the same guy that said we could not trust our teachers in public school to carry guns. Let's see if I understand this correctly, the average teacher in the U. S. has a college degree. The average TSA employee might have completed high school and could have a criminal record. Am I missing something here? (Rhetorical question) Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
Exactly! A good friend of mine, prior service Air Force, told me she wasn't worried about the NSA snooping, because she had nothing to hide. I came back at her with, "So you would then have no problem with your neighbors staring in through the windows of your house, since you have nothing to hide from them??" She understood immediately.
Um, did they say L.A. area arms dealer? Is that what gun shop owners are now? Arms dealers? I guess I was stupid to think 'arms dealers' applied to black market crap.
