Redneck shoots up Pensacola with AK-47

[Gawdzilla Sama]

If you want my guns, come and take them.

[Geoff]

Sarah Palin?

She's pointed towards the camera and HAS HER FINGER ON THE TRIGGER!
Her eye doesn't even look like it's lined up behind the scope.

She's faking.

Oh wait. This means I get to have her gun.

Err..yeah - I googled "guns + stupid" and that was the first image...

[Wumbologist]

Well, I'm really arguing that guns should be banned because their purpose, unlike the car, is to kill people without effort.

There are many "purposes" for guns. Hunting, sport shooting, and personal defense, which yes, may involve killing people. Killing is never ideal, but sometimes it may be the least bad option in a shitty situation. If myself or my family are in immediate danger of death or serious harm, you better believe I want something designed to put that threat down as quickly as possible. The item itself has no intent, it is what the person using it does with it. And in the US, many many millions of people own guns, and yet only a small fraction of the millions of guns here are ever used in violent crime.

And machine guns are for killing lots of people very quickly. Just like high explosives and nerve gas.

What does this thread have to do with machine guns? This guy's AK-47 was most likely a semi-automatic model. "Machine guns" aren't entirely illegal in the US, but the only ones that ARE legal are guns that were manufactured and registered as machine guns before 1986. There is a very small supply of legal machine guns in the US, and as the AK-47 goes, a registered full-auto AK will set you back more than a lot of people make in a year.

So it seems obvious to me that they should be banned. It might take a long time to pay off, but it's still the right thing to do. And the payoff would probably last equally as long.
We should be making it harder for people to kill each other, not easier.

OR, we could try eliminating reasons for people to kill each other. Taking away one tool after another to do the job isn't going to prevent people from killing each other.

It's exactly a year since a guy went mental in the north of England, and killed a couple of dozen people with legal weapons.
All he had to do was gently sqeeze a trigger.
No way would that happen if he went out with a knife. Guns make complete wankers dangerous. In fact, the less the intelligence, the more dangerous the gunman.

He could have killed a lot more people with a Ryder truck, fertilizer, and fuel oil. Or, he could have just driven his car into a crowd at speed. Hell, speaking of knives, there has actually been a rash of knife massacres in China, typically targeting preschools where the attacker can do the most damage in the least time.

[Wumbologist]

Sarah Palin?

She's pointed towards the camera and HAS HER FINGER ON THE TRIGGER!
Her eye doesn't even look like it's lined up behind the scope.

She's faking.

Oh wait. This means I get to have her gun.

Poor trigger discipline = not hot.

[pErvinalia]

Reposted from that other site.

Well, what do they expect? They fucking ran out of crawfish FFS.

http://www.pnj.com/article/20110602/NEW ... 006/news01

A manic shooter peppered a busy Ensley retail strip with assault rifle fire Sunday evening because a local seafood market ran out of crawfish, investigators said.

Larry Wayne Kelly, 42, of Pensacola is in county jail on $575,000 bond facing a slew of felony charges.

Kelly's lead-filled rampage erupted about 7 p.m. when Escambia County deputies received a flood of calls reporting a man speeding through Ensley, blasting an AK-47 assault rifle from the window of a pickup truck.

Here's the problem:

"If you don't have crawfish, you can get crab or something else. Why is crawfish so important?" Nguyen said.

WTF? Huh? Look, buddy, when you've got your heart set on mudbug etouffee you don't just go substituting crab or shrimp or something, you need the goddamned MUDBUGS. Get it? You run a seafood market, what kind of seafood market runs out of crawdads? Might as well say "if there's no sausage then just get bacon instead". Do grocery stores run out of okra? I don't think so. This guy just doesn't understand Gulfcoast culture.

The shooter is one of those "sovereign citizen" nutjobs who believe they can just decide the law doesn't apply to them. He'll likely refuse to defend himself in court, claiming he doesn't "recognize" its authority. He's in for a bit of a surprise when they sling his sovereign redneck ass into Raiford for 30 years.

Won't be a sovereign ass for long in there.

Post of the day!

[pErvinalia]

Red-neck using a Commie weapon... that is the worst crime I see.

It probably wasn't even an AK, the media has no fucking clue when it comes to guns:

This thread is comedy gold!

[pErvinalia]

Follow up in the Pensacola paper. These "sovereign citizens" are certainly a wild and crazy bunch.

http://www.pnj.com/article/20110603/NEW ... k-crawfish

They believe they can declare independence through an obscure legal process, after which they don't have to pay taxes and are not subject to U.S. laws or courts.

They often refuse to obtain Social Security cards or register their vehicles, and they won't carry driver's licenses or use ZIP codes.

Kelly's truck had a homemade license plate when he was arrested.

ZIP CODES! Fucking Federal interference. Fuck your ZIP codes, Imperialist Oppressors!

Numbers are the first step towards SOCIALIZM!!1!

[pErvinalia]

They often refuse to obtain Social Security cards or register their vehicles, and they won't carry driver's licenses or use ZIP codes.

I don't suppose he was keen on gun licences then!

Seriously, this is what happens when you don't allow kids to take their machine guns to school. They don't learn responsible gun ownership.

Every american kid should carry a machine gun. Then you wouldn't get all these shootings.
.

Yeah, it's a shame this guy was able to get a gun. If he hadn't been able to get a gun, he never would have been able to find a way to damage that seafood market.

This thread has probably already descended into the usual gun derail, so I may as well add to it...

C'mon Hornmygandererer, you're smarter than this.

[pErvinalia]

You're absolutely right, and I don't know why other people don't understand this. I mean, nobody ever got killed before guns were invented, so obviously if we banned them (which makes it so that nobody can ever get one), it would go back to being that way.

You seem to be arguing that if an action doesn't fix everything, it's not worth doing.
That's obviously wrong, and plain silly. Is that really your best argument?
If you follow that logic, it would be a waste of time banning plastic explosives.
Because people could still get stabbed.
Or nerve gas. Because people might still get hit with a baseball bat.

Nukes... I needz dem.

[Wumbologist]

This thread has probably already descended into the usual gun derail, so I may as well add to it...

C'mon Hornmygandererer, you're smarter than this.

Smarter than what now?

[JimC]

Very polarised, this thread is...

I like shooting rifles, and hunting, even though I don't do it any more. No way would I advocate one end of the polar extreme, "banning guns"

But the other polar extreme sees some dangerous ending of freedom from pragmatically based restrictions on gun ownership (both type of gun, and person considered responsible enough to own one). You don't need a military-style assault rifle for hunting, and you don't need a hand-gun in your drawer to feel safe. Restricting them, without some overall "ban", works in most countries in the world.

But then we have American exceptionalism...

[FBM]

"because a local seafood market ran out of crawfish,"

Can't blame the guy. Look at what he was missing out on:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GB9-PJle ... re=related[/youtube]

This guy shows how to do it right:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNtzDsOl ... re=related[/youtube]

[Hermit]

nobody has ever been able to prove a causative link between legal firearms ownership and violent crime.

A few months ago I would have disagreed with you. I have done more reading since then.

Results in Australia are mixed.

• Since gun control laws were tightened considerably in 1996, suicide by firearms dropped from 22% to 7%, but suicide by other means increased to the extent that the overall rate actually increased slightly for a while.
• Homicide rates are currently at 1.2 per 100,000. When the gun-controls were tightened they stood at 1.6. Looks good, but in the five years leading up to the legislative changes the rates dropped steadily from 1.9 to 1.6 and in the following five years they plateaued there. Those figures are not useful to supporters of gun control.
• There were 13 massacres in the 18 years prior to the law changes and none in the 14 years since. I think those figures do support gun control, at least in so far as private ownership of automatic and semi automatic weapons has been all but abolished.

[pErvinalia]

This thread has probably already descended into the usual gun derail, so I may as well add to it...

C'mon Hornmygandererer, you're smarter than this.

Smarter than what now?

The spastic line of reasoning that a gun doesn't somehow make it easier to kill and terrorise people.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Yep,when it comes to killing people, guns are for the lazy.