Gun-advocates threaten civil war to protect their guns.

[MKSheppard]

if you could do a UBC that addresses registration concerns, continue to improve NICS(yes I know that Fix NICS was finally passed last year; I submit that there's always room for improvement), that would go a long way.

Nope. You're just using the old bait and switch method to get UBCs in; and then when UBCs don't stop mass shootings, then GASP we'll have to do something else.

July 29 1999 Stockbridge Georgia Day Trading Firms shooting 12 dead
Glock 17, Colt 1911A1
LEGALLY PURCHASED

April 16 2007 Virginia Tech Shooting 33 dead
Glock 9mm, Walther 22
Both LEGALLY PURCHASED by Cho Seung-Hui.

He bought the Walther P22 from an out of state dealer. Under federal law, a weapon purchased from an out-of-state dealer must be shipped to an in-state, federally licensed gun dealer, who runs a background check. The buyer must appear in person to pick up the gun. He picked it up at a pawnshop with a FFL.

He bought the Glock 19 from Roanoke Firearms.

At the time, Virginia had a "one hand gun a month" law; he simply waited and purchased them one a month apart.

Even though Cho was a resident alien, he was legally able to purchase a firearm via providing three forms of identification:

a driver's license
a checkbook with an address matching the driver's license
a resident alien card

Additionally, in both cases, Virginia State Police conducted their own instant background check, on top of the Federal NICS background check.

April 3 2009 New York Immigration Shooting 13 dead
Beretta 92, Beretta PX4 storm 45
LEGALLY PURCHASED & REGISTERED by Jiverly Antares Wong, who also registered them with New York State, as per NY law. He purchased a multiple number of guns from the same gun store.
https://schoolshooters.info/sites/defau ... y_Wong.PDF

Nov 5 2009 Fort Hood Shooting 13 dead
FN Five Seven, S&W 357
LEGALLY PURCHASED by Hasan at GUNS GALORE in Killeen, TX .
https://www.krwg.org/post/report-gun-us ... ally-texas

July 20 2012 Aurora Colorado Theater 12 dead
S&W M&P 15, Rem 870, Glock 22
LEGALLY PURCHASED from three different Colorado Gun Stores (Gander Mountain and Bass Pro Shops).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/colo-shoot ... nt-stores/

Dec 14 2012 Sandy Hook 26 dead
Bushmaster XM15-E2S, Glock 20sf
LEGALLY PURCHASED by mother but stolen after he killed her and cracked the safe

Sept 16 2013 Washington Navy Yard shooting 12 dead
Rem 870
LEGALLY PURCHASED from United Gun Shop, Rockville, Maryland

Dec 2 2015 San Bernardino attack 14 dead
DPMS AR15, S&W M&P 15, Llama 9mm pistol, Springfield XD
LEGALLY PURCHASED by Enrique Marquez Jr from a gun store; he later transferred them to Farook.

June 12 2016 Orlando Nightclub 49 dead
Sig Sauer MCX, Glock 17
LEGALLY PURCHASED by Mateen from a gun store in Port St. Lucie (Rifle on 4 June and pistol on 5 June).

Oct 1 2017 Vegas shooting 58 dead
14 x AR15’s, 8 x 308 AR10’s, 308 Ruger American, .38 S&W M342 revolver
LEGALLY PURCHASED by Paddock.

Nov 5 2017 Sutherland Springs 26 dead
Ruger AR-556 rifle
LEGALLY PURCHASED by Kelley at Academy Sports & Outdoors. USAF had failed to enter details of his domestic violence plea deal into NICS; so NICS passed him.

April 22 2018 Santa Fe Texas 10 dead
12ga Rem 870, Rossi .38 revolver
LEGALLY PURCHASED by father but stolen from him

Oct 27 2018 Pittsburgh Synagogue shooting 11 dead
Colt AR15 SP1, 3 x Glocks in .357 Sig
LEGALLY PURCHASED
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/30/us/a ... oting.html

Nov 7 2018 Thousand Oaks shooting 12 dead
Glock 21 .45
LEGALLY PURCHASED by the shooter under California laws; but he did have some BANNED HIGH CAP MAGS in it.

May 31 2019 Virginia beach shooting 12 dead
2 x .45 Pistols
LEGALLY PURCHASED in 2016 and 2018.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/virginia- ... d-guns-atf

Aug 3 2019 El Paso Walmart 22 dead
WASR 10
LEGALLY PURCHASED from a small "kitchen" FFL. FFL's are legally required to do background checks on all sales and record it in their bound books.

Aug 4 2019 Dayton Ohio 10 dead
AR15 pistol (AM-15)
Lower Receiver ordered over internet, transferred to local FFL and picked up by shooter after he completed NICS Check. LEGALLY PURCHASED.

[MKSheppard]

Even using the dubious mass shooting tracker that the anti-RKBA guys like to use, the incredibly vast majority of "mass shootings" use handguns.

More to the point, the vast vast majority of firearm deaths are from close range shots with minimal rounds fired. I believe Virginia State Police did a study of deaths and the round count of magazines in firearms recovered at scene from the ban-era and post-ban era; and they found it didn't really correlate that much, IIRC.

[MKSheppard]

You didn't even address Lonestar's argument, namely being a projection of how the political conversation will go. Here is the thing with Lonestar, he's broadly progressive AND supports gun rights. He views the history of gun control in the US as a racist history. Because it fucking is (something that the Liberals - note I am using that term as a communist to mean both democrats and republics - have simply let skip over their god damned minds); and generally supports sensible gun control measures. Historically black communities have been targeted with gun control measures to keep them from engaging in community self-defense when the cops were literally assassinating their leaders.

Case in point, California's weapon laws.

From a poster on AR15.com regarding a new court legal challenge to California's knife/blunt object laws:

"If you're wondering why most of CA's prohibitions against batons, dirks, daggers, etc were felonies and carrying a loaded firearm was only a misdemeanor, I can explain it. Back in 1872 when the Penal Code was written, the educated dandies that wrote it believed that undesirables and people of lower class and race carried dirks, daggers, batons, slappers, slungshots, brass knuckles, etc., ergo, felony. Proper white gentlemen carried revolvers and no policeman would ever arrest a gentleman for carrying a revolver. The basis for CA's weapons laws was to keep us Mexicans, Irish and Chinese from carrying weapons."

Further context: A good quality revolver at the time cost a month's wages; so the poorer classes tended to use cheaper weapons.

Another example is North Carolina's pistol permit system.

In order to purchase a pistol, you need a purchasing permit issued by the sheriff of your residence's county.

Back in the day; it was a defacto ban on black people; because a white person could simply travel to another county and wink-nod-nudge get permission from that county's sheriff to purchase a pistol. In today's much less corrupt times; affluent people are more likely to be able to afford living in less dense areas with more gun friendly sheriffs and commuting to work; whereas the poor cannot afford to live anywhere but in urban areas; whose sheriffs are notoriously anti-gun.

PS: The NAACP supports this system.

And here in Maryland:

https://baltimorepostexaminer.com/conce ... 2019/09/24

BPE: As we are speaking, Baltimore City is quickly approaching the 250 murder mark for the year. Its also gearing up for a major election. Is anyone in the mix for political office there taking a pro-gun or a pro-self defense position?

Bissett: I wouldn’t know, to be honest with you, because I don’t follow city politics to that degree. The one thing I can tell you is that I often listen to an African-American talk radio station, and whenever the subject of gun ownership comes up, four out of five callers express outrage that they cannot either purchase a firearm or get a permit to carry one.

When the state passed the Firearms Safety Act of 2013, they created a process that was much more complicated for your average person to buy a firearm. They have to take a safety course and fire one bullet out of a handgun. But there are no ranges in Baltimore City. So, you are not going to be able to fulfill that requirement using public transportation.

There is a requirement to get fingerprinted, and I don’t know how many places do that in Baltimore City. Then there is the requirement to complete the application online using a credit card.

Believe it or not, there is a class of people in this country who do not use credit cards.

BPE: That would bring us back to the hypothetical case of the house-keeper or the carpenter who just deals in cash?

Bissett: Yes. Then they have to use a scanner to enter their documents. Brian Frosh says they can just go to a library, but here you have individuals who are not technically savvy, using equipment which may be on lock-down or not adequately secure. It really puts city residents at a disadvantage to buy a gun, not to mention trying to obtain a carry permit.

BPE: Wouldn’t such technical requirements particularly discriminate against African-American and Hispanic city residents?

Bissett: I believe they do. Given everything we have talked about here, African-Americans and Hispanics are much less likely than a white person to be able to navigate the handgun permit process. And yet, they are more likely to be the victim of a crime.

Let’s face it: The State Police have created a process that is so intricate, so complicated, so convoluted, that a recent immigrant or an uneducated person doesn’t stand a chance.

If you compare a person who went to Harvard to someone who went to Baltimore City Public Schools, the city resident is much less likely to navigate that process.

BPE: Yet the Harvard graduate isn’t the one living in a dangerous neighborhood?

Bissett: Exactly, and that is where people like Civil Rights Attorney Dwight Pettit contend that this system is inherently racist.

[MKSheppard]

He [lonestar] views the history of gun control in the US as a racist history. Because it fucking is (something that the Liberals - note I am using that term as a communist to mean both democrats and republics - have simply let skip over their god damned minds)

Relevant meme:

[Dominus Atheos]

Could you expand on that lonestar? I assume your not talking about illegal drugs, or usa's draconic rules on drink driving or walking drunk?

I'm not sure how else to simplify that, it's pretty self-evident.

You claimed that gun owners are "allowed to impose costs" on everyone else. No shit? Just like nearly everything else on the planet?

I referenced alcohol because it really fits the best from a imposing physical harm standpoint. Alcohol consumers "impose costs" on everyone else. Most people would argue that that doesn't mean alcohol should be banned, even though it only takes a responsible consumer of alcohol once to ruin his day and the day of a lot of other people.

Um, no, you are going to have to spell it out. Different cultural background going on here. I am sort of wondering if problem drinking in the USA is an average weekend in Cardiff, or if you are drawing analogy to someone getting drunk and acting violently?

It might be a population density/car ownership thing. You realize that almost every trip to a bar/pub to and from a home will be by car in the US, right?

[Alyrium Denryle]

Could you expand on that lonestar? I assume your not talking about illegal drugs, or usa's draconic rules on drink driving or walking drunk?

I'm not sure how else to simplify that, it's pretty self-evident.

You claimed that gun owners are "allowed to impose costs" on everyone else. No shit? Just like nearly everything else on the planet?

I referenced alcohol because it really fits the best from a imposing physical harm standpoint. Alcohol consumers "impose costs" on everyone else. Most people would argue that that doesn't mean alcohol should be banned, even though it only takes a responsible consumer of alcohol once to ruin his day and the day of a lot of other people.

Um, no, you are going to have to spell it out. Different cultural background going on here. I am sort of wondering if problem drinking in the USA is an average weekend in Cardiff, or if you are drawing analogy to someone getting drunk and acting violently?

Re the argument comparing to healthcare costs, perhaps I shouldn't use the word cost. Perhaps I should use the phrase, 'unpredicatable, unavoidable, small risk of being killed by accident'. Unusually for a Brit, my school had a shooting range. Guns were treated with respect, but not much more. So it is not irrational fear of the thing, it's just puzzlement why you all accept the current situation.

For the rest (this should work to give you a notification). Broomstick, Alyrium Denryle, TheFeniX; there's a general misunderstanding here. I am not looking to ban 'scary assualt rifles'. I agree that is an irrational posistion. I would like to see a blanket ban (exempting rural and wilderness licenses where they are tools not toys.). This includes mostly de-gunning the cops, apart from specialsit units who recieve actual training. This would not be an overnight thing. I'm sure some people would bury their prize toys, but that's fine. It's not going to do anything there and it's unlikely to be stolen to be used by others.

I can hear the laughter of diseblief from here, but it's a solution that works fine in most developed countires of different levels of belligerence, and I can't see you learning to be as polite and restrained as Switzerland. I don't think the status quo is good enough.

Yeah that's... just not gonna happen. It would require a constitutional amendment to do at this point, an amendment that will not for the foreseeable future be forthcoming. The political reasons for this are largely similar to the reasoning outlined as to why a ban on scary assault rifles is a non-starter, except more.

We can have the rational argument as to whether or not it might be good policy until we're blue in the face. It is simply not politically possible given the culture in which the government sits. So it is not worth considering as a solution or mitigation to the gun problem. Moreover, our border leaks like a pasta strainer. You think the black market for drugs is bad? Wait until the post-drug-decriminalization cartels get their hands on a black market gun trade to meet the massive demand that our gun culture will create if there is a blanket ban.

We could probably disarm or mostly-disarm police (at least in some jurisdictions) and make it work though.

[Eulogy]

Moreover, our border leaks like a pasta strainer. You think the black market for drugs is bad? Wait until the post-drug-decriminalization cartels get their hands on a black market gun trade to meet the massive demand that our gun culture will create if there is a blanket ban.

Oh boy, a War On Guns! Because the War On Drugs was such a stunning success!

[Kamakazie Sith]

It varied from state to state. Some states having ANY alcohol in your system is illegal if you are impaired. Any by any, I mean "the test cannot actually detect it, but the officer arbitrarily determines you are impaired".

I'm curious. Could you provide an example of a state where this is allowed? Specifically I am looking for which states statutes allow a law enforcement officer to declare someone impaired without articulation and/or where no actually detection of a substance is required.

See Utah is one of those states which allows for a DUI arrest due to impairment but it does in fact require a detectable level of alcohol or narcotics and to declare someone impaired you must articulate specific facts that made them impaired. As an officer I can't just say 'He's drunk/high". I have to articulate how the driver was impaired for example - They were involved in an accident, could not maintain their lane of travel, or some other moving traffic violation where impairment is common such as forgetting to turn on headlights or driving while your car is on fire.

So a driver declared drunk by officer can't demand a blood/breath test to cover themselves?

I can't imagine the trial going well for the prosecution if they didn't. Even if a person is refusing to cooperate for a chemical test warrants are now very easy to secure via electronic submission.

Also, 0.08? That's nuts.

In Utah it is .05 now. Could you elaborate on why you think .08 is nuts?

[Dominus Atheos]

It varied from state to state. Some states having ANY alcohol in your system is illegal if you are impaired. Any by any, I mean "the test cannot actually detect it, but the officer arbitrarily determines you are impaired".

I'm curious. Could you provide an example of a state where this is allowed? Specifically I am looking for which states statutes allow a law enforcement officer to declare someone impaired without articulation and/or where no actually detection of a substance is required.

Yeah, articulation. An incredible number of african-american drivers and drivers with out-of-state license plates have "the smell of alcohol/marijuana" and are "driving erratically".

See Utah is one of those states which allows for a DUI arrest due to impairment but it does in fact require a detectable level of alcohol or narcotics and to declare someone impaired you must articulate specific facts that made them impaired. As an officer I can't just say 'He's drunk/high". I have to articulate how the driver was impaired for example - They were involved in an accident, could not maintain their lane of travel, or some other moving traffic violation where impairment is common such as forgetting to turn on headlights or driving while your car is on fire.

Also, 0.08? That's nuts.

In Utah it is .05 now. Could you elaborate on why you think .08 is nuts?

A philosophical difference on whether a driver should be considered "criminally" when there is any impairment on any person or whether the standard should be something more like "a significant number of drivers would fail a driving test with that level of impairment." Like, if most people could still pass a driving test with that level of blood alcohol, that shouldn't be considered criminally impaired.

[Alyrium Denryle]

It varied from state to state. Some states having ANY alcohol in your system is illegal if you are impaired. Any by any, I mean "the test cannot actually detect it, but the officer arbitrarily determines you are impaired".

I'm curious. Could you provide an example of a state where this is allowed? Specifically I am looking for which states statutes allow a law enforcement officer to declare someone impaired without articulation and/or where no actually detection of a substance is required.

Florida. A per se DUI is set at .08, but anyone can be arrested for DUI if the officer determines they are deprived of their faculties. Which... can in fact be completely arbitrary. Thing is, any detectable level in a blood test is basically impossible to beat once you're there, because the body does produce alcohols and their metabolytes on its own. So...yeah. And FL law does not even have that safety net of necessarily requiring a positive test as far as I can tell.

See Utah is one of those states which allows for a DUI arrest due to impairment but it does in fact require a detectable level of alcohol or narcotics and to declare someone impaired you must articulate specific facts that made them impaired. As an officer I can't just say 'He's drunk/high". I have to articulate how the driver was impaired for example - They were involved in an accident, could not maintain their lane of travel, or some other moving traffic violation where impairment is common such as forgetting to turn on headlights or driving while your car is on fire.

Yes, and SLC PD is generally honest. Other departments are not. And given the state of our justice system, poor black people get jammed up even on completely bogus arrests.

I can't imagine the trial going well for the prosecution if they didn't. Even if a person is refusing to cooperate for a chemical test warrants are now very easy to secure via electronic submission.

Bail, and the pathetic state of our indigent defense system. Come on now, you know this is a problem.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Moreover, our border leaks like a pasta strainer. You think the black market for drugs is bad? Wait until the post-drug-decriminalization cartels get their hands on a black market gun trade to meet the massive demand that our gun culture will create if there is a blanket ban.

Oh boy, a War On Guns! Because the War On Drugs was such a stunning success!

Exactly.

[Broomstick]

Thing is, any detectable level in a blood test is basically impossible to beat once you're there, because the body does produce alcohols and their metabolytes on its own.

True. Also, some foods like fruit or fruit juice can contain small amounts of alcohol. Which is why the legal limit for aircraft pilots is set at 0.04% and not zero, because nobody could pass a requirement that BAC be 0%, not even a life-long Mormon who had never touched an alcoholic drink. Note that the mentioned Utah driving limit, at 0.05%, is very close to that.

[madd0ct0r]

Most of the UK drink driving limit is 0.08 (blood), down to 0.05 in Scotland, and for railway work I have to adhere to 0.029
"29 milligrams of alcohol per 100ml of blood
13 micrograms of alcohol per 100ml of breath
39 milligrams of alcohol per 100ml of urine"

On the one hand it's stricter then pilots. On the other, it's more about driving it out of the rail engineering industry.

[Broomstick]

But note that even there the limit was not set at zero. Because that's an impossible standard to adhere to.

[MKSheppard]

July 29 1999 Stockbridge Georgia Day Trading Firms shooting 12 dead
Glock 17, Colt 1911A1
LEGALLY PURCHASED

Improving the list with more information found this morning:

----------------

July 29 1999 – Stockbridge Georgia Day Trading Firms Shooting

12 dead
9mm Glock 17, Colt .45 (used in shooting)
.22 H&R Revolver, .25ACP Raven Pistol (found in duffel bag, unused)

A day trader murdered his second wife and children from his first marriage with a hammer before proceeding to two day-trading firms that had employed him previously, carrying a duffel bag full of weapons.

The perpetrator purchased both the 9mm Glock 17 (November 1993) and the .22 H&R Revolver (Pawnshop in South Carolina in 1976) as the ATF was able to uncover 4473s in his name for those weapons.

The Colt .45 was purchased from a gun dealer in Richardson, TX by someone else and the Raven .25 ACP was purchased in 1991 from a pawnshop in Georgia by someone else.

---------------

So basically 50% of the weapons were formally on 4473s in his name, while the other 50% were off paper through private sales.

[MKSheppard]

October 1, 2017 – Las Vegas, NV Shooting
58 dead

14 x AR15’s, 8 x 308 AR10’s
308 Ruger American (bolt action)
.38 S&W M342 revolver (used to commit suicide with)

No description needed for this one.

Paddock's detailed gun list was:

32nd Floor – Room 32-135 – Main Room (Las Vegas Casino)

Colt M4 Carbine LE451984 (100~ ROUNDS FIRED)
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, and 100-round magazine. Front sight only.

Noveske N4 B15993 (33~ ROUNDS FIRED)
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, and 40-round magazine. EOTech optic.

LWRC M61C 24-18648
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, and 100-round magazine. No sights or optics.

POF USA P-308 UA-1600204
AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod, scope, and 25-round magazine.

POF USA P-15 PE-1600179 (95~ ROUNDS FIRED)
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, and 100-round magazine. No sights or optics.

Colt Competition CCR014544
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, an 100-round magazine. No sights or optics.

Smith & Wesson 342 AirLite Ti CDZ7618
.38 caliber revolver with 4 cartridges, 1 expended cartridge case.

Christensen Arms CA-15 CA04625 (21~ ROUNDS FIRED)
AR-15 .223 Wylde with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, and 100-round magazine. No sights or optics.

LWRC M61C 5P03902 (12~ ROUNDS FIRED)
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, and 100-round magazine. EOTech optic.

FNH FM15 FND000905
AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod, scope, and 25-round magazine.

Daniel Defense DD5V1 DD5007426
AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod, scope, and 25-round magazine.

FNH FN15 FNB024293 (153~ ROUNDS FIRED)
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, and 100-round magazine. EOTech optic.

POF USA P15 03E-1603178 (100~ ROUNDS FIRED)
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, and 100-round magazine. EOTech optic.

Colt M4 Carbine LE564124 (96~ ROUNDS FIRED)
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, and 100-round magazine.

Daniel Defense M4A1 DDM4123629 (95~ ROUNDS FIRED)
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, and 100-round magazine. EOTech optic.

LMT Def. 2000 LMT81745 (100~ ROUNDS FIRED)
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, and 100-round magazine. No sights or optics.

Daniel Defense DDM4V11 DDM4078072 (100~ ROUNDS FIRED)
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock and vertical fore grip. No magazine. EOTech optic.

Sig Sauer SIG716 23D020868
AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod, red dot optic, and 25-round magazine.

Daniel Defense DD5V1 DD5008362
AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod and scope. No magazine.

32nd Floor – Room 32-134 – Hotel Room (Las Vegas Casino)

FNH FN15 FNCR000383 (144~ ROUNDS FIRED)
AR-15 .223/5.56 with a bump stock, vertical fore grip, and 100-round magazine. No sights or optics.

Ruger American 695-93877
.308 caliber bolt action rifle with scope.

LMT LM308MWS LMS18321
AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod and red dot scope. No magazine.

Ruger S R0762 562-13026 (6~ rounds fired)
AR-10 .308/7.62 with a bipod, scope, and 25-round magazine.

LMT LM308MWS LMS18300 (2~ rounds fired)
AR-10 with a bipod, scope, and 25-round magazine.

1372 Babbling Brook Court Mesquite, Nevada (Paddock’s House)

Smith & Wesson SW99 SAB5974
9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Smith & Wesson M&P9 HDU4086
9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Glock 17 BCGM344
9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Mossberg 500 V0397109
12 gauge pump action shotgun.

Sig Sauer 516 20J036999
AR-15 .223/5.56 rifle with a bipod and scope.

Arma-Lite SPRM001 M-10-13530
AR-15 .223/5.56 rifle with a bipod and scope.

Mossberg 590 V0433557
12 gauge pump action shotgun.

LWRC M61C-IC-A5 24-19038
AR-15 .223/5.56 rifle with a bipod and scope.

Mossberg 590 V0348193
12 gauge pump action shotgun.

Mossberg 930 AF0001141
12 semi-automatic gauge shotgun.

Arma-Lite SPRM001 M-10-12006
AR-15 .223/5.56 rifle with a bipod and scope.

Sig Sauer 516 20K046207
AR-15 .223/5.56 rifle, with a bipod. No sights or optics.

Lantac LA-R15 Raven LT-0297
AR-15 .223 Wylde rifle with a bipod and scope.

Mossberg 590 P833785
12 gauge pump action shotgun.

Arsenal Saiga 12 H09423015L
AK-47 style semi-automatic 12 gauge shotgun.

Arsenal Saiga 12 H07420684
AK-47 style semi-automatic 12 gauge shotgun.

Beretta 92F C856302
9mm semi-automatic pistol.

FN 5.7 386215450
5.7mm semi-automatic pistol.

1735 Del Webb Parkway, Reno, Nevada (Paddock’s House)

Smith & Wesson 340 DCA2099
.357 caliber revolver.

Beretta 92A1 A098515Z
9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Remington 870 Tactical RS90036Z
12 gauge pump action shotgun.

Mossberg 590 V0187184
12 gauge pump action shotgun.

Glock 17 Gen4 BBVN828
9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Smith & Wesson M&P9 HHA9534
9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Smith & Wesson M&P9 HDL4053
9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Paddock purchased at least 67 firearms since the early 1980s. His first purchase of a gun, on 14 July 1982, was for a Charter Arms Undercover .38 Special Revolver.

Known purchases through FFL's by Paddock by Year:

1982: 1
1983: 1
1986: 1
1987: 3
1991: 1
2000: 7
2001: 2
2008: 2
2015: 1
2016: 12
2017: 31

Of the 67 firearms known to law enforcement, 24 were recovered inside the Mandalay Bay, 18 were recovered in Paddock’s Mesquite residence and seven were recovered in Paddock’s Reno residence. Of the firearms Paddock purchased, 18 are unaccounted for. It is unknown if these firearms were sold or traded.

Per the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department report on the Vegas shooting:

“Paddock committed no crimes leading up to the October 1 mass shooting. All the weapons and ammunition he purchased, were purchased legally. This includes all the purchases Paddock made at gun stores as well as online purchases. Paddock did not commit a crime until he fired the first round into the crowd at the Las Vegas Village.”

[Alyrium Denryle]

He [lonestar] views the history of gun control in the US as a racist history. Because it fucking is (something that the Liberals - note I am using that term as a communist to mean both democrats and republics - have simply let skip over their god damned minds)

<Snip Relevant Meme>

Exactly. You can't have a revolution - or defend yourselves against strike-breakers who have guns like the pinkertons, cops, or national fucking guard - without guns. And dancing. You need both.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Yeah, articulation. An incredible number of african-american drivers and drivers with out-of-state license plates have "the smell of alcohol/marijuana" and are "driving erratically".

Indeed. Articulation is open to abuse as is any system with humans. The issue I'm curious about is how easy to the local laws and procedures make it. For example, procedures and laws that require articulation of observations backed by physical evidence is far superior than what I think is being alleged here, specifically, that in some states laws and procedure allow for a police officer to declare you drunk without articulation and without securing a chemical test. Based on what I've seen so far that does not seem to be the case.

A philosophical difference on whether a driver should be considered "criminally" when there is any impairment on any person or whether the standard should be something more like "a significant number of drivers would fail a driving test with that level of impairment." Like, if most people could still pass a driving test with that level of blood alcohol, that shouldn't be considered criminally impaired.

NHTSA is the organization behind DUI investigation and the standardization of testing.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/drunk-driving

Florida. A per se DUI is set at .08, but anyone can be arrested for DUI if the officer determines they are deprived of their faculties. Which... can in fact be completely arbitrary. Thing is, any detectable level in a blood test is basically impossible to beat once you're there, because the body does produce alcohols and their metabolytes on its own. So...yeah. And FL law does not even have that safety net of necessarily requiring a positive test as far as I can tell.

Florida is suppose to follow NHTSA standardization for DUI investigation and it is not arbitrary. An officer must articulate how a traffic stop went from the scope of a moving violation to a DUI investigation. Then the officer must articulate how the DUI investigation developed probable cause with the ultimate goal of securing a chemical test.

The chemical tests are blood, breath, and urine. Urine is rarely used. Breath is the most common but blood is quickly catching up due to the ease of securing electronic warrants. Now, I've been told that the intoxilyzer does not detect natural body produced alcohol which seems to be confirmed when I got to try it out and blew straight zeros. Blood tests are considered more accurate and again don't find natural body alcohol levels. They're looking for alcohol content that's relevant to the limits set by state law. An example of this is a narcotic DUI. Blood test results don't show alcohol in the system but do show the narcotics.

Of course, I'll review any source you have that contradicts this.

Yes, and SLC PD is generally honest. Other departments are not. And given the state of our justice system, poor black people get jammed up even on completely bogus arrests.

I am aware but my conversation has nothing do with this. I am curious about laws and procedure. Specifically, I was interested in any states that have statutes that do not comply with NHTSA standardization and similar procedures. So far I haven't seen any shown. Florida DUI statute is not unusual.

Bail, and the pathetic state of our indigent defense system. Come on now, you know this is a problem.

I do. My point still stands. Even a person defending themselves could bring this defense up with success. Not even attempting to secure a chemical test screams reasonable doubt.

Here's the thing though. My conversation here is about law and procedure. It's not about misconduct from law enforcement. However, the biggest issue with law enforcement misconduct isn't the language of DUI statutes nor their procedures. It is the lack of accountability and oversight. I'm not discussion those things.

[MKSheppard]

Since this is the NRA thread by default:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... zation.pdf

New US Senate Minority Report on the NRA and Russia, reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[Gandalf]

Also, 0.08? That's nuts.

In Utah it is .05 now. Could you elaborate on why you think .08 is nuts?

Because that's more impaired than I would think ideal for driving a car. In Australia it's .05, and .02 for those on a provisional license. Zero for learners.

[Lonestar]

Nope. You're just using the old bait and switch method to get UBCs in; and then when UBCs don't stop mass shootings, then GASP we'll have to do something else.

I said in the same thing you quote that Continual improvement is needed for NICS, you dummy.

I also said I wanted violent misdemeanors added to the prohibited person list.

Your jerk off "WELL IT WON'T DO 100% SO NOT WORTH IT" is why we are where we are. This is the same shit you pull with climate change mitigation as well.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Also, 0.08? That's nuts.

In Utah it is .05 now. Could you elaborate on why you think .08 is nuts?

Because that's more impaired than I would think ideal for driving a car. In Australia it's .05, and .02 for those on a provisional license. Zero for learners.

Interesting. I'm actually not a supporter of the new .05 limit in Utah. Mostly because I feel it is imposed by the religious leaders of the state. However, now that I know other countries have a similar approach maybe more research on my part is warranted.

Most states have what is called "not a drop" for people under drinking age or people with past DUI convictions.

[Gandalf]

Interesting. I'm actually not a supporter of the new .05 limit in Utah. Mostly because I feel it is imposed by the religious leaders of the state. However, now that I know other countries have a similar approach maybe more research on my part is warranted.

Most states have what is called "not a drop" for people under drinking age or people with past DUI convictions.

Victoria's Transport Accident Commission has a page explaining the limit and its rationale.

I'd be in favour of .02 across the board, but alcohol is really popular here. Troublingly so.

[MKSheppard]

I'm reading that NRA report by the Senate and ran across this:

Brownell described the events that resulted in Butina and Torshin meeting Trump, Jr. in a May 22, 2016,
email, the day after the meeting to then-NRA President Cors:

Allan –

I have a report of a very unfortunate situation involving David Keene and a set of
circumstances leading to his decision to leave tomorrow morning.

David also expressed a strong desire to resign from the board. I use strong but he
actually told me he is resigning from the bird (sic) and turning in his nra membership.

I am hoping a night to sleep on it gives him pause on this action.

This stems from a dinner reservation mishap in which David arrived at catch 23
yesterday evening with mr Torshin, the Russian delegation and 2 of his friends, stating
he was with the NRA.

Unfortunately Catch 23 placed him in ‘the NRA’ reserved room only to have it be the
wrong reservation.

When it was realized by the restaurant or by NRA (Wayne sheets), I'm not sure whom was
the catalyst of this realization, David was asked to move.

David became incensed and understandably felt a deep sense of insult and humiliation.

There was a prolonged sense of extreme anger, one that I was very surprised to see from
David.

The nra party was Wayne sheet's gathering of roughly 30 donors in which was the hosts.

Ollie North, Woody and Don Trump were counted amount the members present.

We are tracking down the facts of just what lead up to this situation. There is pretty of
convincing evidence that David has made a mistake on what restaurant his reservation was
in … it was not catch 23, and the restaurant Catch 23 has made an error in handling
confirming which nra reservation was being placed and then the moving of David out.

So, David will be on a plane out tomorrow with strong thoughts of resigning from
board and nra.382

Specifically:

The nra party was Wayne sheet's gathering of roughly 30 donors in which was the hosts.

I investigated Wayne Sheets after noticing his name in NRA Tax Form 990 filings:

A NRA Executive Staff Member received a $685K deal in 2016 from NRA and lives in a quasi GFZ

Basically in 2016; Wayne Sheet's company:

HWS Consulting
221 Homeport Drive
Grasonville, MD 21638

received $685K from the NRA as a "fundraising consultant"

I only noticed it because I scuba dive off the boat landing off of Kent Island, and I've stayed in a hotel with a Grasonville postal address.

So I checked it out. (see link).

[Alyrium Denryle]

Indeed. Articulation is open to abuse as is any system with humans. The issue I'm curious about is how easy to the local laws and procedures make it. For example, procedures and laws that require articulation of observations backed by physical evidence is far superior than what I think is being alleged here, specifically, that in some states laws and procedure allow for a police officer to declare you drunk without articulation and without securing a chemical test. Based on what I've seen so far that does not seem to be the case.

Articulation is required in FL, but the standard is Either/Or not And if I remember correctly.

Here is the statute.

316.193 Driving under the influence; penalties.—
(1) A person is guilty of the offense of driving under the influence and is subject to punishment as provided in subsection (2) if the person is driving or in actual physical control of a vehicle within this state and:
(a) The person is under the influence of alcoholic beverages, any chemical substance set forth in s. 877.111, or any substance controlled under chapter 893, when affected to the extent that the person’s normal faculties are impaired;
(b) The person has a blood-alcohol level of 0.08 or more grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood; or
(c) The person has a breath-alcohol level of 0.08 or more grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath.

There is no lower limit, mere articulation is legally sufficient, and while in practice it might be better for their case to secure some positive test or another, a single beer (effectively a BAC or .02 or .015) won't cause meaningful impairment in just about anyone, but it would still be sufficient to convict, and depending on the sensitivity of the test, they could detect even lower than that from naturally produced alcohol in the body and it would be sufficient to convict. And they don't even require that by statute.

Now, I've been told that the intoxilyzer does not detect natural body produced alcohol which seems to be confirmed when I got to try it out and blew straight zeros. Blood tests are considered more accurate and again don't find natural body alcohol levels. They're looking for alcohol content that's relevant to the limits set by state law. An example of this is a narcotic DUI. Blood test results don't show alcohol in the system but do show the narcotics.

That isn't how chemical tests like that work. It can't differentiate between what is produced in the body and what isn't. Ethanol is Ethanol. Acetaldehyde is Acetaldehyde. They're designed to not be sensitive enough to detect alcohol below a certain concentration. Given the Either/Or nature of Florida's statute, that's a problem.

Now, maybe that's not a problem in practice? I can't exactly look up the procedures of every PD in Florida. However, we can probably get a good proxy based on what the defense attorneys talk about in their various websites. It turns out yes. It does occur.

https://klgdefense.com/dui-surprising-r ... n-florida/

Police Officer Observations
Even if a police officer administers a breathalyzer test to a driver, and the result shows a BAC of below 0.08 percent, the officer may still be able to arrest the driver. Moreover, a prosecutor may still be able to charge the driver with DUI. In this instance, the prosecutor will rely heavily on police officer evidence and observations to show that the driver was impaired at the time of the traffic stop. Driver impairment may include any or all of the following:

Defects in motor skills
Blurred vision
Slurred speech
Poor balance

They can in fact still do it. A prosecutor might not bother very often, but the problem isn't the trial. It's everything that happens before the trial. It doesn't even need to be officer misconduct. Field sobriety tests are ridiculously inaccurate, with false positive rates in the 30-40% range. Hell, I almost got DUI'd once (without a drop of booze) in AZ because I was driving the posted speed limit (4th of July, the posted speed limit was 50. I was doing 50, but the officer thought the limit had been changed back to 65) and my car (you know the one) had a slight rightward drift since I bought that I had to continuously correct (no matter how many times I had the alignment checked and supposedly fixed). If he'd administered a sobriety test, I likely would have failed because I have the dexterity of a god damned corpse, have a certain amount of nystagmus in my right eye (that's the reason I keep it closed much of the time, you've seen this) and tend to want to say the alphabet in german and would get confused trying to do it backwards.

I would have been acquitted(probably), but I'd still be fucked by the whole legal process.