read this article and wondered...

[miamited]

Man in anthem attack convinced Trump ordered it, lawyer says

Hi all,

I just read this article and it says that the man was convicted of violent assault in 2010. Now he has apparently committed another violent assault. I was just wondering, do you think this guy owns any guns? If he does, or doesn't, would he qualify, in your estimation, as someone who shouldn't?

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[civilwarbuff]

Given this statement.....
Brockway, who is charged with felony assault on a minor, is a registered violent offender after being convicted of a 2010 charge of assault with a weapon.
......one would hope it is unlikely........

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Man in anthem attack convinced Trump ordered it, lawyer says Hi all, I just read this article and it says that the man was convicted of violent assault in 2010. Now he has apparently committed another violent assault. I was just wondering, do you think this guy owns any guns? If he does, or doesn't, would he qualify, in your estimation, as someone who shouldn't?...

Did someone (Trump or someone else) order it ?

 

[Lost4words]

Did someone (Trump or someone else) order it ?

Lol.

 

[miamited]

Did someone (Trump or someone else) order it ?

Hi Y,

Order what? I'm not questioning the 'why' of what he's accused of doing. I'm asking for people to read the article and note all the 'red flags' that pop up in this guys account. He's been convicted of assault previously, he apparently has some mental condition from an accident and now he's thrown a 13 year old to the ground for being belligerent and refusing to take his hat off for the anthem.

Should that man have legal access to firearms? Then, of course, the next question is whether he does have any flag on his criminal background to prevent him from buying a firearm? Then, the next question is whether he does own any firearms? He could have bought one or some at a gun show where back ground checks are not required. He could have asked someone to get one for him.

My point being, that here's a man that, as far as I'm concerned, should not be allowed to own a firearm. How can we stop him from actually getting one? Does the failure of a background check necessarily mean that someone who wants to get their hands on a firearm, mean that they can't?

I readily admit that all my questions are based on supposition and what if, but I think they are valid questions that we need to ask, as a nation, if we're really going to find someway to control 'who' can have possession of a firearm.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

shalom

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

shalom

 

[civilwarbuff]

Is there a follow-up story that says he had firearms?

 

[miamited]

I don't know.
Should licensed doctors who routinely cause death and illness be allowed access to the manmade drugs that cause death and illness ? Does anyone ask this ?

Hi Y,

So, your position is that if we can't stop them all we shouldn't stop any.

Got it.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[miamited]

Is there a follow-up story that says he had firearms?

Hi CWB,

No, but this story mentions that his earlier conviction was 'with a weapon'. So, he obviously has had access to some sort of weapon. Now, whether it was a firearm or not, I don't know. However, I think, given the circumstances explained in this article, that someone should be finding out. This article seems to describe the perfect person who might flip out and decide to go human hunting if angered enough.

I'm just wondering if any one is actually looking for these 'red flag' events?

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[miamited]

Look up the statistics on the AMA and the FDA websites about how most deaths are caused by doctors/ the medical profession/ or at least in the top three reasons,
tens of thousands of deaths every year,

a lot more than that man caused ? (how many did he cause ? )

Hi Y,

Why would I do that? It has no bearing on the subject of my thread. If you want to entertain yourself in that way, then go right ahead. I think I've fairly well explained my purpose for this thread and it has nothing to do with stopping every kind of culpable death that exists in the world.

You seem to have become gravely offended at my posture here in asking these questions. May I ask why?

So far he hasn't caused any, but isn't that what President Trump seems to think is how we should be finding and dealing with these 'mass shooters'? Find the 'red flag' events in people's lives.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[redleghunter]

Did someone (Trump or someone else) order it ?

It’s one of those “the devil made me do it” defenses. A sign of a very lawyer.

 

[A Realist]

Should that man have legal access to firearms?

No. And I would not want to be standing next to him at the shooting range I frequent. Matter of fact, I would not want to be at the shooting range at all if he was there.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

shalom

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

shalom

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

shalom

 

[eleos1954]

Hi Y,

So, your position is that if we can't stop them all we shouldn't stop any.

Got it.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

People who are "bent" on harming others will find a way to do that ... guns or not ... why just look at those who own guns? How would that be done? How and who decides who is mentally unstable or not?

If one is found mentally unstable (by whatever entity would have that responsibility (the government/police/judge?) ... is that for life? or if a person is treated ... can that person have their constitutional right to possess a fire arm restored?

Who would be the authority deciding all these things?

Would one who is reported "thought" to be mentally unstable then be required to submit to a full blown mental examination to verify that claim? By who? Would they have the right to challenge that examination?

 

[miamited]

I'm not even a teeny-weensy-tiny bit offended by the op/topic so fat ... just curious and testing to see
not what you think, but what people think, about the disparity in attention given to
some things vs a much more grave threat, a real threat, to their lives and their children and their relatives ....

I didn't read or see your posture/ purpose,
and if it was about any shooters at all, why then, them, instead of the major causes of death that are avoidable, if people simply know the truth ?

Hi Y,

Hey!!! So start your own thread! Why hijack mine to make some completely separate point than what I started the thread for? Go ahead and start your own thread, "the many ways that we kill one another and what we can do to stop each one". People have a choice as to whether they want to go to a doctor and they are free to look up such statistics as 'how many people a particular doctor has killed' before they make that decision.

I'm not so sure that all those dead people in El Paso and Dayton and all the myriad of other cities and towns where gunmen have gone on murderous rampages, had such a choice.

God bless,
In Christ, ted

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

shalom

 

[miamited]

I don't know why anyone would try to stop a couple murders, vs stopping tens of thousands of "legal" murders (of their children and family) every year ....

Hi Y,

Look, you've obviously got a bone to pick with the medical profession. All I'm asking is that you go pick your bone in your own thread.

God bless,
In Christ, ted