12 Dead in Naval Yard Shooting

[Highlord Laan]

It was probably Evil Black with an extended tube.

And "Law-Enforcement-Style" too. Why do you think you need a weapon meant for Police use, citizen?

A better question is what do they mean by "Law Enforcement-Style"?

Its a shotgun with a safety and a has a mounting rail for accessories
Villainous!

Just like how the AR15 is a semi-auto hunting rifle with some plastic furniture. You're asking about how a half-brained morn with a hate on for guns and the mental capability of a Kindergarten dropout classifies firearms. Don't. Trying to understand that flavor of idiot is a lot cause.

[Ritterin Sophia]

A better question is what do they mean by "Law Enforcement-Style"?

It has a shoulder thing that goes down?

Shows what you know, it's a shoulder thing that goes up!

[Broken]

From an article on the New York Times website, this guy apparently test-fired an AR-15 at the gun shop he bought the shotgun at. The only reason he didn't buy that weapon as well was a state law that bans the sale of such weapons to out-of-state buyers. So this could have easily been worse then it already was.

[Broomstick]

Would an AR-15 necessarily be worse than a shotgun? After all, a shotgun seemed to be quite effective at killing in this situation.

[Patroklos]

I am really curious as to why everyone is harping on this security clearance thing. As far as I know you don't need a security clearance to get into that base but rather just a CAC card (military ID). That’s all you need to get onto any normal military installation and all contractors who would work on a military base would have one (and it would work anywhere). This would go for high end think tank experts to shipyard pipe fitters. For reference a good portion of sailors don't have any security clearance.

For clarity when most people say security clearance they specifically mean secret and above. Confidential is what anyone who is breathing has. The security clearance would really only be relevant to getting into particular buildings which would have named access at a manned checkpoint/quarterdeck or a seperate badge scanner that was precleared for that specific place and those who work there (ie not everyone with a secret clearance).

[Metahive]

The thing is that "security clearance" overlooked the guy packing serious heat and having a known history of violent shootings. The military of all people should be expected to know best about gun safety and handling procedures.

[Vejut]

From an article on the New York Times website, this guy apparently test-fired an AR-15 at the gun shop he bought the shotgun at. The only reason he didn't buy that weapon as well was a state law that bans the sale of such weapons to out-of-state buyers. So this could have easily been worse then it already was.

In regards to the VA gun store, that story is probably at least garbled. As far as I know (haven't tried it personally, but looked it up for a gun show last weekend), Virginia is perfectly willing to sell any not-handgun ATF legal firearm you want to you legally speaking, but certain neighboring states, such as Maryland, won't let you buy certain guns they deem "assault weapons", such as the AR-15, out of state. He may have run into that, though not sure where his current state of residence was.

[Broomstick]

I am really curious as to why everyone is harping on this security clearance thing.

For the last 12 years we've had our civil rights infringed in the name of security with the promise that doing so would keep us safe.

Apparently, there is a falsehood somewhere in that plan.

[Andras]

From an article on the New York Times website, this guy apparently test-fired an AR-15 at the gun shop he bought the shotgun at. The only reason he didn't buy that weapon as well was a state law that bans the sale of such weapons to out-of-state buyers. So this could have easily been worse then it already was.

In regards to the VA gun store, that story is probably at least garbled. As far as I know (haven't tried it personally, but looked it up for a gun show last weekend), Virginia is perfectly willing to sell any not-handgun ATF legal firearm you want to you legally speaking, but certain neighboring states, such as Maryland, won't let you buy certain guns they deem "assault weapons", such as the AR-15, out of state. He may have run into that, though not sure where his current state of residence was.

As a MD resident, I can buy certain AR15s in VA. I can buy AR15 rifles with the HBAR barrel profile, which is not considered a regulated weapon under MD's rules. Any other AR15 barrel profile requires a 7+ day wait (getting on several months these days.) I can go to VA, buy an HBAR AR15 over the counter, return to MD and replace the barrel (or the entire upper) with any other kind I want, completely legally.

Last I heard he test fired an AR15, tried to buy a handgun and was turned down, and left with the shotgun.

[Ritterin Sophia]

As a MD resident, I can buy certain AR15s in VA. I can buy AR15 rifles with the HBAR barrel profile, which is not considered a regulated weapon under MD's rules. Any other AR15 barrel profile requires a 7+ day wait (getting on several months these days.) I can go to VA, buy an HBAR AR15 over the counter, return to MD and replace the barrel (or the entire upper) with any other kind I want, completely legally.

That doesn't even make any sense, not you but the law. The only difference between an HBAR and other AR-15s is a marginal weight increase and better barrel endurance and most every major commercial AR-15 comes standard with an HBAR, typically you have to special-order M4 or M16A2 barrel assemblies if you want them. I'm also reading that the AR-10 is A-OK as well? Who the fuck wrote these laws?

[Grumman]

Who the fuck wrote these laws?

Idiots, or corrupt assholes who cater to idiots.

[Vejut]

People twenty or more years ago, copying California, who don't really know much about the details of firearms, and are trying to get some kind of gun control against moderately strong opposition. There's a list of mostly experimental, rare, or Hollywood firearms in MD, plus the AR-15, AK, and SKS, and if its on that list, pistol purchase rules apply. And yeah Andras, forgot about the HBAR loophole, but was mostly trying to communicate that it was MD's "Regulated firearms" laws that may have been the problem, not the VA side ones. If he tried to buy a pistol, that'd be different though, VA does restrict sales of those to people out of state.

[Irbis]

Why do you think you need a weapon meant for Police use, citizen?

Assuming it's not NRA-approved rhetorical question, yes, why would you need weapon meant for people who routinely expose themselves to trouble? Are you living in Syria or something? Humanity moved past hiding daggers in clothes and wearing side swords lest you be mugged, and saner parts moved past the obsessive need to be armed with as many military guns as possible.

You know, in this very thread people discuss how you can buy off-state AR-15 rifle, yet any pro-NRA gun owner will repeat the came canned response that states that try to regulate guns aren't safer (well, yeah, when just one state can poison efforts of all neighbouring ones, and in case of Mexico, even neighbouring countries).

It's also sad how people in US don't see connection between talk of so-called 'responsible gun owners and absolutely not militia members' 'resisting guvmint' and scared cops hiding between blue wall, wearing military grade guns and kevlar armour, cops that are more likely to shot you (see threads from just this week) than walk up to you without gun and ask if there is any problem they can help you with, like in Europe.

[Justice]

Why do you think you need a weapon meant for Police use, citizen?

Assuming it's not NRA-approved rhetorical question, yes, why would you need weapon meant for people who routinely expose themselves to trouble? Are you living in Syria or something? Humanity moved past hiding daggers in clothes and wearing side swords lest you be mugged, and saner parts moved past the obsessive need to be armed with as many military guns as possible.

You know, in this very thread people discuss how you can buy off-state AR-15 rifle, yet any pro-NRA gun owner will repeat the came canned response that states that try to regulate guns aren't safer (well, yeah, when just one state can poison efforts of all neighbouring ones, and in case of Mexico, even neighbouring countries).

It's also sad how people in US don't see connection between talk of so-called 'responsible gun owners and absolutely not militia members' 'resisting guvmint' and scared cops hiding between blue wall, wearing military grade guns and kevlar armour, cops that are more likely to shot you (see threads from just this week) than walk up to you without gun and ask if there is any problem they can help you with, like in Europe.

Doesn't this rather miss the point that the ideas of "Law Enforcement-Style" and "Military-Grade" are so nebulous and based on personal perception to be absolutely meaningless as a way of classifying weapons?

[TheFeniX]

Assuming it's not NRA-approved rhetorical question, yes, why would you need weapon meant for people who routinely expose themselves to trouble? Are you living in Syria or something? Humanity moved past hiding daggers in clothes and wearing side swords lest you be mugged, and saner parts moved past the obsessive need to be armed with as many military guns as possible.

Remember kids, you're obsessive for buying glorified hunting rifles done up to look tacticool.

But I wouldn't want to put a stop to the anti-gun idiot checklist you've got going on here:
1. Insist gun owners are paranoid: check
2. Insist gun owners are insane: check.

Now we're just waiting for the part where you regal us with your expert opinion that we're just killers biding our time.

It's also sad how people in US don't see connection between talk of so-called 'responsible gun owners and absolutely not militia members' 'resisting guvmint' and scared cops hiding between blue wall, wearing military grade guns and kevlar armour, cops that are more likely to shot you (see threads from just this week) than walk up to you without gun and ask if there is any problem they can help you with, like in Europe.

Oh shit, we've got the trifecta.

Whatever that means, the fact is gun ownership in the US is at an all-time high and violent crime is continuing to decrease. If cops are scared about legitimate gun owners not shooting at them and/or robbing/murderering people: that's their problem.

But please continue being a judgmental asshole and giving the police force an easy scapegoat for increased militarization.

Anyways, Alexis had multiple issues

Alexis was arrested in Seattle in 2004, for shooting at a parked car in what he called an "anger-fueled blackout," he brought up 9/11 during his interrogation and "how those events had disturbed him," police said.

Among the problems: an arrest in September 2010 by Fort Worth police after he accidentally fired a bullet into the apartment above him while he was cleaning a gun with slippery hands. Prosecutors determined that there wasn’t enough evidence to bring a recklessness case.

In August, Newport, R.I., police were called to a Marriott Hotel room where Alexis said he was being followed by three people and heard voices coming from his closet. He couldn't sleep because he thought they were using a microwave machine to send vibrations through the ceiling, the police report says.

For a bit of reference: the father of a good friend was going dove hunting and decided to buy a new shotgun for the event. He was denied because he was going through an (amicable) divorce at the time. But a history of gun fuckups and mental health problems: load up.

Also, from here:

The WSJ also notes his mental health history. Although Alexis recently sought mental health treatment through the Veteran's Administration, a court must decide whether someone is "mentally unfit" to own a gun under federal law.

See, that's a problem considering the US's already horrible mental health care. But, why not just ban shotguns and consider the problem fixed?

[PeZook]

If cops are scared about legitimate gun owners not shooting at them and/or robbing/murderering people: that's their problem.

Your cops are scared and paranoid because dozens of them get killed every year. It's not an imagined fear, and it is caused in a large part by the fact the US has more guns than people, so any encounter with a potential criminal has to be done with the assumption they are armed with a gun.

Like it or not, the US being awash with guns and ammunition is at the center of many of your problems. Well, that and racism and poverty and mental health care, but it's really telling that having piles upon piles upon piles of weapons floating around is treated as a god-given right, while free health care isn't.

It's one of those things, along with crowing how your violent crime rates keep falling (from absurd to merely very high! Great success!), that make people think the US is a parody of a country.

[Grumman]

Why do you think you need a weapon meant for Police use, citizen?

Assuming it's not NRA-approved rhetorical question, yes, why would you need weapon meant for people who routinely expose themselves to trouble?

Because this is a stupid question. Law enforcement wants the same things out of a rifle as anyone else: reliability, accuracy, availability. It's like trying to claim the Crown Victoria was a "police car" and that there's something wrong with you if you wanted one.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Assuming it's not NRA-approved rhetorical question, yes, why would you need weapon meant for people who routinely expose themselves to trouble?

This is five different versions different versions of the same gun that the shooter used. The first is an 870 Express with wood furniture, pretty typical of a civilian shotgun, with a capacity of five shells: four in the magazine and one in the chamber. The second is the 870 Marine Magnum, the difference between them is a nickel-plated finish and synthetic furniture for rust and water resistance and a 7-round tube magazine, no functional difference except ammo capacity. The third is an 870 Police "Entry Gun", it has a 14-in barrel for concealment and is thus designated a "short-barrel shotgun", sale of such weapons is heavy regulated and all legal sales have to go through the BATFE system and an FBI background check which takes around six months to complete. The last two are Remington 870MCS "Modular Combat Shotgun" with an 18-in and 10-in barrel, these guns are also heavily regulated because they're sold as an assortment of modular barrels and stocks, they're also regulated under the NFA system the 870 "Entry Gun" is and thus difficult to get unless you have a squeaky-clean record, in addition to being both relatively rare and expensive; the only functional difference is the ability to break the weapon down for ease of carry, changing out stocks or barrels for preferences, and rails for different sights, lasers, or lights. This is why we have a problem with the term "law-enforcement style shotguns", because the shotguns we use for deer or waterfowl hunting are only superficially different from the guns that the police and military have traditionally used.

[Beowulf]

If cops are scared about legitimate gun owners not shooting at them and/or robbing/murderering people: that's their problem.

Your cops are scared and paranoid because dozens of them get killed every year. It's not an imagined fear, and it is caused in a large part by the fact the US has more guns than people, so any encounter with a potential criminal has to be done with the assumption they are armed with a gun.

Like it or not, the US being awash with guns and ammunition is at the center of many of your problems. Well, that and racism and poverty and mental health care, but it's really telling that having piles upon piles upon piles of weapons floating around is treated as a god-given right, while free health care isn't.

It's one of those things, along with crowing how your violent crime rates keep falling (from absurd to merely very high! Great success!), that make people think the US is a parody of a country.

According to preliminary statistics released today by the FBI, 47 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty in 2012.
[snip]
An additional 45 officers were accidentally killed in the line of duty in 2012.

Police officers are as likely to die from accidents as for someone trying to shoot them. They're scared and paranoid not because the statistics support them being scared and paranoid, but because their professional media tells them they should be scared and paranoid.

[amigocabal]

I note that the shooter was taken down by the D.C. Metropolitan Police.

I know that the Navy has masters-at-arms (MA's), who serve as police and would normally be the first responders in this type of situation. It seems implausible that one man could have overwhelmed the MA's. Or did the MA's at the time call for backup because they did not know how many attackers there were?

[Kamakazie Sith]

Police officers are as likely to die from accidents as for someone trying to shoot them. They're scared and paranoid not because the statistics support them being scared and paranoid, but because their professional media tells them they should be scared and paranoid.

Sorry to pick on you about this but I feel compelled to respond now.

I'd argue that if we were scared and paranoid then we'd be pointing guns at everyone we meet. Our training is about being cautious. Sure, we see videos of what can happen if you let your guard down and those videos usually show rapidly evolving situation that ends in the officer being killed but our training does not reflect a reaction to that. For example, if I encounter someone jay walking then my reaction will NOT be to point my gun at them. I won't be placing them in handcuffs while I'm writing them a citation, and I won't be patting them down for weapons, and unless they're behaving in a suspicious manner then I probably won't asked for a backup officer. This behavior is pretty standard of cops nationwide. Even on domestic violence investigations, one of the most dangerous call for service a cop can be called to, the only thing that changes out of that list is that a backup officer will be dispatched with the initial. Unless there is information of a weapon being involved we won't be pointing our guns at people, we won't be placing them in handcuffs until such time as probable cause is developed for an arrest, and we won't be patting them down unless we have a reason to think they are armed. We will, however, control the scene. That means everyone follows instructions and remains calm.

Why do people insist on comparing traffic accidents with the active murder? They aren't remotely comparable and I'll tell you why. The majority of those 45 officers killed in traffic accidents were either not paying attention, or driving in a reckless manner, or not looking for possible threats. For example, when I'm going through a green light I always check to my right and left to ensure that all other vehicles have come to a stop. It's saved me from an accident a handful of times because someone was about to run a red. I'm being cautious. Is that paranoia?

However, the majority of the officers killed by gunfire were doing what they were taught but it still wasn't enough to save them. Generally, if you drive in a responsible and defensive manner then it is highly unlikely you will die in a traffic accident. However, you can do everything right in a gun fight and still die because you're facing off against another human being that can adapt and counter. Traffic accidents generally don't get multiple attempts to kill you.

Now back to the OP. I have never heard of a law abiding citizen with no history of mental illness gunning down a police officer. I agree that the large number of firearms in circulation is curtailing even the most basic of firearm controls. Limiting what law abiding citizens can do won't fix this problem. There does need to be improved and standardized gun regulation through the entire nation but if a competent, responsible, and law abiding individual wants to buy an AR-15 because he enjoys the experience of shooting it at a range then he/she should be able to.

[Patroklos]

I note that the shooter was taken down by the D.C. Metropolitan Police.

I know that the Navy has masters-at-arms (MA's), who serve as police and would normally be the first responders in this type of situation. It seems implausible that one man could have overwhelmed the MA's. Or did the MA's at the time call for backup because they did not know how many attackers there were?

Most commands don't have armed MAs, and when they do at large installations like say the Norfolk Naval Base there are generally far more rent-a-cops or civilian cops (like some federal complexes bases will have their own civilian police departments). On top of that many security duty positions are filled by non MA sailors who are either in transition between commands or otherwise in limbo who may or may not be armed. A lot of gate guards are these sailors.

From what I heard there were seven civilian police officers on duty at the Naval Yard at the time. One of the issues was that all of them were manning security checkpoints so they had to close them before reacting.

[TheFeniX]

Like it or not, the US being awash with guns and ammunition is at the center of many of your problems.

You mean like the "absurdly violent" rural areas high in gun ownership but are actually low in gun crime (suicides being most of them)?

Well, that and racism and poverty and mental health care, but it's really telling that having piles upon piles upon piles of weapons floating around is treated as a god-given right, while free health care isn't.

Holy shit! Actual social problems that lead to violent crime that need fixing? Crazy!

It's one of those things, along with crowing how your violent crime rates keep falling (from absurd to merely very high! Great success!), that make people think the US is a parody of a country.

America has a crime problem: Who. Fucking. Knew? However, so high on your soapbox, you might have missed that gun ownership has skyrocketed in America. If your hypothesis (read: inane ramblings) were anywhere near true, we'd be seeing at least some form of increase in violent crime rather than the steady decrease that's been happening since the 90s. It seems that legal gun ownership doesn't have a large effect on crime either way. But don't let facts get in the way of your ranting.

I also love the back-end idea that "America is stupidly violent you stupid American. Wait, you want a gun to protect yourself? You paranoid idiot!" that seems to permeate these types of threads.

I agree that the large number of firearms in circulation is curtailing even the most basic of firearm controls. Limiting what law abiding citizens can do won't fix this problem. There does need to be improved and standardized gun regulation through the entire nation but if a competent, responsible, and law abiding individual wants to buy an AR-15 because he enjoys the experience of shooting it at a range then he/she should be able to.

Actual registration doesn't do anything except track legal sales of weapons. It's not like a car where you can etch VINs into the windows and other expensive to replace parts on a car to deter thefts. The theft/loss of guns should be required to be reported to the police (for all the good it would do) and someone might be able to convince me for the same concerning gun sales (I personally keep records of sales for my own piece of mind, even when sold to family), but the serial numbers on a gun are the first to go when they hit the street and there's no reliable way to track them after that.

There really needs to be more handled on the back-end to make a gun harder to land in the hands of people who can't (or shouldn't) have them. Since many illegal guns are sold by corrupt FFLs, we need better enforcement in those areas because that kind of shit is already against the law. People who participate in illegal straw-buys need to be spanked hard and the FFL that allowed it as well.

However, on the legislative side of things: the American political system is too fucked up to be up to the task. Republicans won't bring anything sane to the table because the NRA and political suicide. The Democrats constantly bring idiotic stuff to the table which just gives the NRA more ammunition to fight the actual sane stuff (like mandatory reporting and responsibility for psychiatric problems).

[amigocabal]

Like it or not, the US being awash with guns and ammunition is at the center of many of your problems.

You mean like the "absurdly violent" rural areas high in gun ownership but are actually low in gun crime (suicides being most of them)?

Well, that and racism and poverty and mental health care, but it's really telling that having piles upon piles upon piles of weapons floating around is treated as a god-given right, while free health care isn't.

Holy shit! Actual social problems that lead to violent crime that need fixing? Crazy!

It's one of those things, along with crowing how your violent crime rates keep falling (from absurd to merely very high! Great success!), that make people think the US is a parody of a country.

America has a crime problem: Who. Fucking. Knew? However, so high on your soapbox, you might have missed that gun ownership has skyrocketed in America. If your hypothesis (read: inane ramblings) were anywhere near true, we'd be seeing at least some form of increase in violent crime rather than the steady decrease that's been happening since the 90s. It seems that legal gun ownership doesn't have a large effect on crime either way. But don't let facts get in the way of your ranting.

I also love the back-end idea that "America is stupidly violent you stupid American. Wait, you want a gun to protect yourself? You paranoid idiot!" that seems to permeate these types of threads.

I agree that the large number of firearms in circulation is curtailing even the most basic of firearm controls. Limiting what law abiding citizens can do won't fix this problem. There does need to be improved and standardized gun regulation through the entire nation but if a competent, responsible, and law abiding individual wants to buy an AR-15 because he enjoys the experience of shooting it at a range then he/she should be able to.

Actual registration doesn't do anything except track legal sales of weapons. It's not like a car where you can etch VINs into the windows and other expensive to replace parts on a car to deter thefts. The theft/loss of guns should be required to be reported to the police (for all the good it would do) and someone might be able to convince me for the same concerning gun sales (I personally keep records of sales for my own piece of mind, even when sold to family), but the serial numbers on a gun are the first to go when they hit the street and there's no reliable way to track them after that.

There really needs to be more handled on the back-end to make a gun harder to land in the hands of people who can't (or shouldn't) have them. Since many illegal guns are sold by corrupt FFLs, we need better enforcement in those areas because that kind of shit is already against the law. People who participate in illegal straw-buys need to be spanked hard and the FFL that allowed it as well.

However, on the legislative side of things: the American political system is too fucked up to be up to the task. Republicans won't bring anything sane to the table because the NRA and political suicide. The Democrats constantly bring idiotic stuff to the table which just gives the NRA more ammunition to fight the actual sane stuff (like mandatory reporting and responsibility for psychiatric problems).

One other thing about guns is that they do not need to be smuggled in, unlike heroin and cocaine.

Sten guns can be made in basement workshops.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Actual registration doesn't do anything except track legal sales of weapons. It's not like a car where you can etch VINs into the windows and other expensive to replace parts on a car to deter thefts. The theft/loss of guns should be required to be reported to the police (for all the good it would do) and someone might be able to convince me for the same concerning gun sales (I personally keep records of sales for my own piece of mind, even when sold to family), but the serial numbers on a gun are the first to go when they hit the street and there's no reliable way to track them after that.

Just to clarify. I wasn't talking about gun registration. I was talking about regulation.

There really needs to be more handled on the back-end to make a gun harder to land in the hands of people who can't (or shouldn't) have them. Since many illegal guns are sold by corrupt FFLs, we need better enforcement in those areas because that kind of shit is already against the law. People who participate in illegal straw-buys need to be spanked hard and the FFL that allowed it as well.

This is what part of what I mean when I say regulation.

However, on the legislative side of things: the American political system is too fucked up to be up to the task. Republicans won't bring anything sane to the table because the NRA and political suicide. The Democrats constantly bring idiotic stuff to the table which just gives the NRA more ammunition to fight the actual sane stuff (like mandatory reporting and responsibility for psychiatric problems).

Agreed.