Since it seems this is going to be a topic that is worthy of it's own thread.

So far the federal judge is dead, as is a 9 year old child. The judge may have been the target as well remember, we don't know.

Scores wounded, evidence that it was a fully automatics weapon from the reports. Arizona allows open carry of many weapons, I'm not sure if that extends to automatic.

My buddy over at ninebullets.net says the target website is offline now, in fact it has been thoroughly 'scrubbed' from the Internet according to him.

Jared Lee Loughner. may be his name this story has a link to a YouTube channel that might be his.

Opinion piece from March 25, 2010 about Palin's crosshairs.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...es-vio_b_512539.html

She is expected to recover as of now, although there are six dead... So far.

Is it right to lay this at the feet of the takebackthe20 website? It was taken down within hours of the attack. Friend of mine notes that it was 'scrubbed' from the Internet.

Thoughts on whether this can be considered a political attack incited by palin? Is it odd that the site could so thoroughly scrubbed so fast? Not just taken down but taken down like it never existed.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: editengine,

I'm for gun rights. Reasonable ones. I'm also for reasonable control of firearms. A concealed-carry-without-permit law was recently enacted in Arizona. I don't call that reasonable.

This guy was legal until he pulled the trigger.

I'm not saying that's only because of that legislation, but it's easy to argue that concealed-carry-without-permit presents challenges to law enforcement they wouldn't have without it. Does law enforcement in Arizona need more challenges?

The people pushing concealed-carry-without-permit were even saying if more people were armed, it would prevent this sort of thing.

Didn't prevent this one. And the guy wasn't even shot. He was tackled.

He killed a Federal Judge, so regardless of the status of the Congresswoman, your thread title remains accurate.

From looking at this guy's attempts at syllogisms on YouTube, I wouldn't be surprised if he (like myself) had a terrible time with Gödel, Escher, Bach. I didn't feel like shooting anyone, but to this day, granted the opportunity, I'll kick Douglas Hofstadter in the nuts.

quote:

Originally posted by Trogdor:
I'm for gun rights. Reasonable ones. I'm also for reasonable control of firearms. A concealed-carry-without-permit law was recently enacted in Arizona. I don't call that reasonable.

This guy was legal until he pulled the trigger.

I'm not saying that's only because of that legislation, but it's easy to argue that concealed-carry-without-permit presents challenges to law enforcement they wouldn't have without it. Does law enforcement in Arizona need more challenges?

The people pushing concealed-carry-without-permit were even saying if more people were armed, it would prevent this sort of thing.

Didn't prevent this one. And the guy wasn't even shot. He was tackled.

The problem about (any) legislation is that it's respected only by law abiding citizens. This guy would carry his gun concealed being it legal or illegal because he was decided to kill people. It would even prove non productive a law forbidding the possession of guns because once he decided to kill people he would go to illegal dealers/traffickers or would do something worse as building a bomb.

On the other hand, he was out of his mind. Put weird things in Youtube but it seems that his love for things like Mein Kumpf were not enough to draw attention of authorities... perhaps he failed in not using the word jihad or some derivative...

quote:

The problem about (any) legislation is that it's respected only by law abiding citizens.

So let's not have laws? Come on!

Even in Wyoming, they don't just have to apply, they have to attend a specific training regime and take a test. The process is designed to catch nutjobs. Felons can't get them and even most misdemeanors cause an exclusionary period. You have to be a Grade A, law-abiding citizen to concealed carry. You won't find CC guys using drugs, at all, or even drinking to excess. Public intoxication? You lose that card.

The CC law in Arizona wasn't even implemented to assure gun rights. It was a strategic wedge issue designed to elect TeaParty people.

Yes, he might have been able to do this anyway. But he would have been in violation of the law an hour sooner. So would cop killers. So would bank robbers. Overall, it increases the chances the person will be caught before they can do harm. If you're a cop and you see a hint of a gun showing on someone's person, you can stop them and ask for their permit (with your hand on the but of your own Glock... like they do).

In AZ, the TeaParty people claimed that it is everyone's right to carry a hidden firearm. Assassinations aren't the problem here. Local, State and Federal law officers deserve to expect to live until they retire, to see their kids graduate from school, etc.

Forget about assassinations, this is anti-cop legislation. Ask one. Ask a cop.

quote:

Originally posted by Trogdor:
(...)

So let's not have laws? Come on!

(...)

Forget about assassinations, this is anti-cop legislation. Ask one. Ask a cop.

What I meant is that legislation, in this case would not help to avoid assassination. It's near impossible to avoid crazy people accomplishing their purposes only by means of bureaucratic actions. Police intelligence should be proactive about people who publicly express certain discourse (like liking Mein Kumpf).

I also understand that it's necessary to have some regulations about firearms ownership. Like proper registration and even the necessity of gun owners to submit themselves to sanity checks from time to time. But no law will work if it's not uniform around the country (meaning: no sense in controlling gun ownership in one state if you're able to cross frontier and buy it in the neighborhood).

About carry, one important thing is to determine where's even legal to carry a gun. No reason to allow people carrying guns in closed public areas (like banks, cinemas, shopping centers, schools, etc). What a civilian do with a gun in a shopping center? or cinema?

Regarding to the incidents in Arizona, given the presence of federal judge and other authorities, I guess it would be legal for police to scan attendants in order to determine if they're carrying or not. I guess that under the "patriotic act" it would even be possible to arrest them for further interrogation.

Just a final question: since it happened in Arizona, if the guy was not Loughner and fond of TP theories but someone like Chavez, Rodriguez, Sanchez or other Latin family name, would he been able to kill seven people before being hold (not by police but by someone in the crowd)?

quote:

What I meant is that legislation, in this case would not help to avoid assassination.

Then I'm sorry. For the most part, you're right about that.

They scrubbed the PalinPAC site, but forgot to scrub her facebook page. She (well, probably not Palin herself) is also trying to delete her tweets, not realising they've already been saved for posterity.
Palin mouthpiece Rachel Mansour claims the targets were "cross-hairs like you’d see on maps".

Now people are looking for maps that have cross-hairs on them. None yet found.

There's some satellite-imaging alignment marks that look something like that, I guess.

Why do we have to have a license to operate a motor vehicle?

All comes down to that.

If you take the written portion of your drivers test and you write things about everyone being illiterate and draw pictures of your new idea for coinage, you won't get a license.

When an officer checks your license, he or she can be assured you didn't do that. No license? They take your car.

quote:

Originally posted by Trogdor:
Why do we have to have a license to operate a motor vehicle?

All comes down to that.

If you take the written portion of your drivers test and you write things about everyone being illiterate and draw pictures of your new idea for coinage, you won't get a license.

When an officer checks your license, he or she can be assured you didn't do that. No license? They take your car.

That part is a fraction of what I call "sanity check".

But a sanity check goes further: evaluation by psychiatrist and psychologist in order to see if one is stable/sane enough to own a firearm. No license for ex-cons, no license for people being criminally prosecuted, etc. If guy screws shortly after being evaluated, doctors, psychologists and other professionals on evaluation crew get charged for letting a wacko having a gun.

quote:

But a sanity check goes further: evaluation by psychiatrist and psychologist in order to see if one is stable/sane enough to own a firearm. No license for ex-cons, no license for people being criminally prosecuted, etc. If guy screws shortly after being evaluated, doctors, psychologists and other professionals on evaluation crew get charged for letting a wacko having a gun.

Now we're speaking the same language. That's where we need to get, right there. Some states are moving in the opposite direction. Arizona moved nearly all the way in the opposite direction. Only way they could go further is start giving Glocks to (white) citizens. I assure you there are people who are thinking of proposing that.

Wasn't Loughner rejected by the Army? That's a pretty fucking big red flag right there. Seems to me it says "He shouldn't even be allowed to use a firearm in a controlled environment, under strict supervision."

Last month Pima County Republicans held a target-shooting event in support of Giffords' Tea Party opponent.

Tweeted by Mike Moore:

quote:

If a Detroit Muslim put a map on the web w/crosshairs on 20 pols, then 1 of them got shot, where would he b sitting right now? Just asking.

An excellent question.

quote:

Originally posted by Gromit:
Last month Pima County Republicans held a target-shooting event in support of Giffords' Tea Party opponent.

They're Americans and don't do dates properly, so it was in June, but the point still stands.