Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Mindflayer wrote:This ties EVERY mass shooting recently directly to a failure of the mental health system in the USA.

How does Ft Hood fit into this? Kind of a stretch, I would think.

The Fort Hood shooter was a devout Muslim who actually advertised his hatred of Americans. The only crazy people there were in the command that allowed him to operate as a shrink.

BBC is reporting there was a SWAT stand down order given during Monday's shooting.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/24153252

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

OK I heard today from a person that works at the Navy Yard that all weapons were ordered "Condition 3" Really,
Why would the Military order all guards to carry UNLOADED Firearms.. The Shooter killed a guard and took his AR 15, the shooter then noticed it was not loaded and dropped it. If the guard would have had a loaded weapon he could have stopped the shooter before more people were killed... WTF is this all about..

The conspiracy theories are already flying on this one, your source would fit into quite a few of them.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Six week cycles, right? #tinfoil

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Your right.. I questioned that as well,
The New York Times did print a correction to there multiple WRONG reporting

NYT Corrections:
Alexis bought a Remington 870 Express 12-gauge shotgun and about two boxes of ammunition, or about 24 shells. The purchases were approved after the store owner conducted the required federal background check,

The Virginia State Police said Tuesday that Mr. Alexis had passed all state and local background checks to buy the shotgun.

Despite statements on Monday from senior law enforcement officials — which were widely reported in the news media, including in The New York Times — that an AR-15 had been found at the scene, no such gun has been found. The authorities say they do not believe the gunman used one.

So how does this play into the Vice Presidents narrative to "Just buy a Shotgun and fire a couple of shots into the air"

GeneFrenkle wrote:BBC is reporting there was a SWAT stand down order given during Monday's shooting.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/24153252

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Did these guys self-deploy to the scene? If so, that is a huge no-no in the emergency response world. The story seems like they showed up on their own and when they asked if they could engage, they where told to stand down.

Now, if someone in the local PD was asking for support from CERT and it was rejected by CERT GWO or watch captain (not sure of their titles), that would be pretty bad too.

2k05gt wrote:OK I heard today from a person that works at the Navy Yard that all weapons were ordered "Condition 3" Really,
Why would the Military order all guards to carry UNLOADED Firearms.. The Shooter killed a guard and took his AR 15, the shooter then noticed it was not loaded and dropped it. If the guard would have had a loaded weapon he could have stopped the shooter before more people were killed... WTF is this all about..

I have a family member who was an MP in the Army. He told me that when they were working sate-side they had 1 mag in the gun and 3 to 5 spare mags. The mags all had ammo but the weapon wasn't charged (one in the chamber.)

My wife worked on Quantico for years. One of her co-workers husband was an MP. He said the same thing.

I think your friend may have heard the same thing, but misunderstood. I think some people say the weapon is not loaded until there is a round in the chamber. There is a huge difference between Unloaded and no ammo.

forgot to quote; see below.

ratherfish wrote:The prior incident (police report to Navy) should have triggered suspension of his clearance and access and he should have been escorted out of the facility and credentials removed until an investigation was complete.

The officer at the Navy has blood on his hands if he didn't forward it to security.

But that would be racist...

More reports of bizarre behavior by Alexis.

http://gma.yahoo.com/navy-yard-shooter- ... ories.html

I have a hard time believing that story. I am surprised they published it given the lack of ability to confirm validity.

Not saying it's not possible... just saying the family might be full of BS.

MarcSpaz wrote:I have a hard time believing that story. I am surprised they published it given the lack of ability to confirm validity.

Not saying it's not possible... just saying the family might be full of BS.

I find it completely believable. it is exactly the kind of thing that happens in airports all the time, without any shootings to follow. There are a lot of very weird people, and we get numb to their weird behavior. No one connected the dots on this guy, and it is no surprise. None of the dots were very big. My concern is the opposite: the feds (or somebody) actually starts looking at ALL the dots and trying to connect them. The NSA does that for a living, so it is not a fantasy. There will be a lot of false positives.....

tursiops wrote:

MarcSpaz wrote:I have a hard time believing that story. I am surprised they published it given the lack of ability to confirm validity.

Not saying it's not possible... just saying the family might be full of BS.

I find it completely believable. it is exactly the kind of thing that happens in airports all the time, without any shootings to follow. There are a lot of very weird people, and we get numb to their weird behavior. No one connected the dots on this guy, and it is no surprise. None of the dots were very big. My concern is the opposite: the feds (or somebody) actually starts looking at ALL the dots and trying to connect them. The NSA does that for a living, so it is not a fantasy. There will be a lot of false positives.....

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I have had similar concerns since this has unfolded. I have been concerned that in the future really intrusive things will be done and those people who are the "watchers" will be inclined to label people as dangerous persons not worthy of any position of responsibility or trust or gun ownership based on some transient and relatively benign lapse of patience and decorum; using the experience with Aaron Alexis as justification. And of course, once that label has been attached, the burden would be upon the poor guy wearing the label to clear his name and justify his behavior. I think it is not only not a fantastic concern; I think it may be at least as likely as not.

dorminWS wrote:
I have had similar concerns since this has unfolded. I have been concerned that in the future really intrusive things will be done and those people who are the "watchers" will be inclined to label people as dangerous persons not worthy of any position of responsibility or trust or gun ownership based on some transient and relatively benign lapse of patience and decorum; using the experience with Aaron Alexis as justification. And of course, once that label has been attached, the burden would be upon the poor guy wearing the label to clear his name and justify his behavior. I think it is not only not a fantastic concern; I think it may be at least as likely as not.

I agree with this. At first the media made a lot out of the gun arrests that the shooter had. So he had two arrests. I'm not saying that he was an angel, but big deal -- those didn't indicate that he was going to be a mass murderer. Now they're focusing on how he got a security clearance. In my mind, that's missing the issue, which is that he was a mass murderer. So they're going to review the investigation and clearance procedures and blah blah blah. They're worried about how many government people conducted the background checks compared to how many contractors did the checks (as if that really makes a difference). How is that going to change anything for the better? They are just looking for a scapegoat, and since blaming the gun won't work this time, they have to find something else to blame. I just hope they don't over react and prevent someone who got in a schoolyard fight when they were 16 from getting a clearance or ever owning a gun.

time.

The man had complained of "microwave brain control" (specifically commanding auditory hallucinations) and develops a pattern of blackouts curiously involving firearms that did not previously exist.

He took these concerns to the police himself which I find odd.

Then about a month and a half later he uses quite possibly the most mundane firearm in the country to waste a dozen lives on a military base.

An interesting Army report on microwaves specifically mentions "aural bioeffects" http://media.portland.indymedia.org/med ... 412898.pdf

The fact that microwaves have been studied and tested for communication and psychological warfare makes me wonder if we have a Manchurian candidate situation.

End

The effects of radio waves on the body and brain have been general knowledge for a century. I read articles from the early 1900's about an RF bath as treatment for some medical conditions. There is nothing new there.

If the guy did have something wrong with him due to RF exposure, it would likely be from that tard standing in front of a VLF parabolic to stay warm on cold nights.

This is maybe slightly off topic, but even the larger capacity 870 off the shelf holds 7+1 for a total of 8 rounds. Why with navy or military personnel likely surrounding this guy did someone not stop him while he reloaded the 870 ? Or did he start using that stolen pistol from the guard after firing all 8 shotgun rounds? It takes a long time and concentration to reload a shotgun, so I am surprised someone didn't take action if and when he was reloading.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I'll tell you why... because Dianne Feinstein and her little lib buddies' theory about banning high capacity magazines to save lives is a complete crock of poop!

More people died in this shooting than in the theater shooting in Aurora Co., and this guy didn't have an AR with a 100 round drum, a shotgun, a pistol, homemade tear gas and 1,000 rounds of ammo. It was one guy with 24 rounds and an old school style pump shotgun.

No one in there right mind is going to bum-rush a guy when they "think" he is reloading. In rare cases you will hear of care givers shielding children and family or loved ones trying to protect each other in the face of certain death. But that is extremely rare and those people typically die. Most people who are with strangers or acquaintances at work and are unarmed have the "flight" part of "fight or flight" kick in when it come to facing a gunman.