masterrig

I disagree. There are no laws against discriminating against people based on their past bad behavior. This whole case is weird. I hold a Secret clearance, and one of the questions on the SF-86 is "Have you ever received a discharge that was other than honorable?" The shooter would have had to answer yes to that question. I'm suprised he was still able to receive a Secret clearance. True. Questions in regard to 'criminal' history are allowed. Thanks for pointing that out. Chuck

It was reported also that 'supposedly' he contacted 2 professional sources who he said would not help him. This made him upset and he went over the edge and proceeded to open fire. To me, it's amazing that the guy, with all that has been said about his background, was able to get 'top security'. How was the guy allowed to get this far? Someone somewhere wasn't paying attention. Chuck I remember the old days when employers would never hire someone with less than an honorable discharge. I guess that doesn't float today. I think, that's because of all the anti-discrimination laws that have been passed. Chuck

Apparently Mr. Alexis had never been convicted of anything, so he WAS a law abiding citizen, right up until the instant of his death. Ask Turtlespeed. However, he WAS Texan. http://spdblotter.seattle.gov/2013/09/16/suspect-in-navy-yard-attack-previously-arrested-in-seattle-for-anger-fueled-shooting/ Law abiding, except for the whole shooting out the tires of cars in 2004 He wasn't tried and or convicted of a crime. I believe, from what I've been told, a person is innocent till proven guilty. Seems as though, over the years, that has taken a 180. Chuck I didn't say he was convicted or a criminal. There are plenty of ways you can not abide by the law and still not not be tried or sentenced. But I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that in Seattle, its not abiding by the law if you shoot out car tires in a parking lot. I see your point... and it's a good one! You brought-out another good point... why didn't Seattle charge him with something like 'discharging a firearm in city limits' or disorderly conduct or vandalism... they really missed the boat, there. Not un-like others along the way who let him slip through the cracks. Chuck

It was reported also that 'supposedly' he contacted 2 professional sources who he said would not help him. This made him upset and he went over the edge and proceeded to open fire. To me, it's amazing that the guy, with all that has been said about his background, was able to get 'top security'. How was the guy allowed to get this far? Someone somewhere wasn't paying attention. Chuck

Apparently Mr. Alexis had never been convicted of anything, so he WAS a law abiding citizen, right up until the instant of his death. Ask Turtlespeed. However, he WAS Texan. http://spdblotter.seattle.gov/2013/09/16/suspect-in-navy-yard-attack-previously-arrested-in-seattle-for-anger-fueled-shooting/ Law abiding, except for the whole shooting out the tires of cars in 2004 He wasn't tried and or convicted of a crime. I believe, from what I've been told, a person is innocent till proven guilty. Seems as though, over the years, that has taken a 180. Chuck

*** Just like Texas toilet paper![/quote Yup! Rough, tough and don't take shit off nobody! Chuck

However, he WAS Texan. NO! He just lived here! Chuck

I still feel that if guns are taken away from law abiding citizens, the bad guys will still have guns. Law enforcement know who the bad guys are... why don't they take their guns? Probably because the bad guys have their second amendment rights! The good guys don't! Seems to me, there is too much 'knee-jerk reaction and no common sense in regard to the gun issue. Chuck

SOP! Stack laws on laws. If ya' can't beat 'em... confuse 'em. Chuck

Of course there is a record. If he was arrested, there is a record of it. What I was trying to get across was, the background check for a CHL here in Texas is very thorough. They check everything and when they're finished they make a determination. The shooter in this incident also had full security clearance at the Navy ship yard. The one thing that hasn't been said is if he had a Texas CHL before or after the shooting incident in Washington State or if he had one at all!! Chuck

Did the media say whether or not the shooter held a Texas CHL before the shooting incident or after the shooting in Seattle? A conviction would prevent him from obtaining a CHL. An arrest only, would come under close scrutiny by Texas DPS. Chuck "There's no record that he was ever prosecuted, and a spokeswoman for the Seattle City Attorney's Office, Kimberly Mills, said Monday that her office never received the report from police so did not review it for possible charges." An explanation to Texas DPS on his application would be looked into during the background check portion of the application process. It would be up to the Texas Department of Public Safety to approve the application or not. Chuck What would they look at if there's "no record" and "no report"? Just a routine check with authorities. They won't just take the applicant's word for it. Chuck And the check turns up "no record" and "no reports". What then? Continue the background check. At the completion they approve or not. Like any other. Chuck

Did the media say whether or not the shooter held a Texas CHL before the shooting incident or after the shooting in Seattle? A conviction would prevent him from obtaining a CHL. An arrest only, would come under close scrutiny by Texas DPS. Chuck "There's no record that he was ever prosecuted, and a spokeswoman for the Seattle City Attorney's Office, Kimberly Mills, said Monday that her office never received the report from police so did not review it for possible charges." An explanation to Texas DPS on his application would be looked into during the background check portion of the application process. It would be up to the Texas Department of Public Safety to approve the application or not. Chuck What would they look at if there's "no record" and "no report"? Just a routine check with authorities. They won't just take the applicant's word for it. Chuck

Did the media say whether or not the shooter held a Texas CHL before the shooting incident or after the shooting in Seattle? A conviction would prevent him from obtaining a CHL. An arrest only, would come under close scrutiny by Texas DPS. Chuck "There's no record that he was ever prosecuted, and a spokeswoman for the Seattle City Attorney's Office, Kimberly Mills, said Monday that her office never received the report from police so did not review it for possible charges." An explanation to Texas DPS on his application would be looked into during the background check portion of the application process. It would be up to the Texas Department of Public Safety to approve the application or not. Chuck

Did the media say whether or not the shooter held a Texas CHL before the shooting incident or after the shooting in Seattle? A conviction would prevent him from obtaining a CHL. An arrest only, would come under close scrutiny by Texas DPS. Chuck

That's what I'm saying. Good example of media misleading the public. Something to stir-up the anti gunners and anti CHL folks. Chuck

Their law abiding up until the time they commit their first crime, Then their a criminal for the rest of their life. The shooter is a real piece of work. http://home.myhughesnet.com/news/read/category/Top%20News/article/ap-police_responding_to_reported_shooter_at-ap Chuck Yep. but: "He is believed to have a criminal record there and to be a holder of a concealed carry weapon permit." Perps allowed to have guns. OK... here again one slips through the cracks. Looks pretty bad to all outward appearances. Could the media have worded that so as to make Texas and CHL's look bad? "It is believed he has a criminal record... where is the author's proof of that? Was it a felony or misdemeanor? Oh, the wonderful, mis-leading media. Chuck

Their law abiding up until the time they commit their first crime, Then their a criminal for the rest of their life. The shooter is a real piece of work. http://home.myhughesnet.com/news/read/category/Top%20News/article/ap-police_responding_to_reported_shooter_at-ap Chuck

There has to be a "reasonable" inquiry. A person can subjectively be in fear that his/her life is in danger. Meanwhile, the circumstances are that no reasonable person thinks that the girl scout was trying to give out a cookie bomb. On the other hand, there may be circumstances where others can reasonably believe that a person's life is at risk when a person is involved in combat but the person is not subjectively afraid. For example, a person raises his fists and goes to pummel a guy, but the victim is Floyd Mayweather who can lick anyone and had no subjective fear. There does have to be an element of subjective and one of objective. I consider myself a reasonable man. I'm sure most people also consider themselves the same, that's where it gets interesting. I can understand. What is reasonable to one may be un-reasonable to another. I do believe that if, a person honestly feels at the time, their life is in danger and there is no other way, go ahead and shoot. I feel too, if you can 'escape' or talk your way out of it, that's the best way. A law enforcement officer told me years ago, 'your mouth is a powerful weapon. what you say carries a lot of weight.' Chuck

Let me see you say that in the middle of a car jacking with a gun to your head. You see his finger tightening on the trigger and you have a gun in your hand . . .[/quote There was an incident of road rage in Dallas a few years ago. One guy got out of his car and started yelling and punching a guy who was sitting in his car and stuck in traffic and not involved in the 'road rage'. The guy who was being beat upon told the guy to back-off. The guy just continued punching and yelling. the guy in the car, being beaten, pulled his pistol and killed the guy beating him. The driver with the gun had a CHL and was no-billed by a grand jury. Ya' never know how it will go. Chuck

Hang on now... can she make biscuits and gravy? I'd bet the ranch, she can! Chuck

She wins! Nothing else left to do except give her the crown! Chuck

Like this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPd67CEL54E Good grief! Chuck

Then . . . mission accomplished. That's exactly the point (regardless of how distasteful). Yup! It's all about the money! They just come across as cheesy, to me. Chuck

And that's the real tragedy of this right there. Plus, coffee will make you hafta whizz, old man. Best take care where you let er rip. By golly, you're right! After all, coffee 'natural' diuretic! Ain't that a bitch! Well, in fairness, not the worst. Chemical weapons and genocide would probably be worse. But it would be worse than, say, most sex offenses or punching out some grandma. Well, I guess, there are worse things than a lawyer advertising. It just gets to me when I hear one say; "Have you been injured by a BIG TRUCK?" or another is from a local mouthpiece; 'One of my clients was in a bad wreck and broke her leg. I got her $68,520 and 27 cents... that's in her pocket!' He comes across like an ambulance chaser. Chuck

There ya' go! Either that or the kid now days would come back with his 'posse' and a couple A-K's! Chuck