Virginia Beach shooting and a question

[WRW]

I'm just not quite sure that preemption includes executive orders. Otherwise, libraries would be posted "No Guns".

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[wittmeba]

I still feel the laws are confusing and vague by design. One of two things happen -- either you take the risk thinking you understand the gun laws as written or you won't carry -- just how the libs want it. It is far too risky to take a chance with the possibility of being wrong. If you are wrong you risk the loss of ALL your gun rights -- nothing proportional to the crime again just how the libs want it.

[WRW]

Off the top of my head, meaning I should be checked behind, the executive order banning carrying in a State building would be enforced under trespass laws...misdemeanor. It's been a long time since I have looked into it...

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[domin8ss]

I think you're correct.

Furthermore, a few days ago Tim Kaine said part of the blame for this mass shooting falls on people who could've done something, but didn't. Does he not understand that prohibiting lawful carry and then making that statement is akin to victim blaming?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[WRW]

As one opposed to the right of self defense for victims he could look in a mirror to find fault.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[SHMIV]

Seems that Kate Nixon had a serious discussion with her husband, about carrying at work, the night before she was murdered. She decided against it, so as not to get into trouble.


https://www.foxnews.com/us/gun-free-zon ... orney-says

This is frustrating, to me. I wonder how many other victims were not carrying, for the same reason? I wonder how many others in the building would have been otherwise armed, and inclined to take on the shooter?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[dusterdude]

Someone,maybe mr.nixon,needs to sue the city over the gun free zone

Sent from my LG-US601 using Tapatalk

[AlanM]

These gun-prohibitions didn’t keep us safe in Virginia Beach. Why would new laws work any better?
.
-The murderer passed a required background check. The background checks, which looks backwards, failed to predict future behavior. Background checks never find new criminals.

-Local preemption means that cities can write their own gun laws that are more restrictive than state law. Virginia Beach did that and it failed to stop this murderer. In fact, it enabled the attack.

-Virginia Beach declared its municipal building as a “gun-free” zone. The city did not post armed guards after they disarmed their employees. We know that murderers prefer “gun-free” zones for their attacks because these zones disarm the intended victims. We also know Virginia Beach city employees wanted to go armed at work for their own safety.

-Concealed carry licensing didn’t disarm the murderer. All the criminal histories and fingerprint requirements failed to identify this murderer or stop him, but these gun-prohibitions might have disarmed his victims.

-We already regulate noise suppressors on firearms, but that didn’t disarm the murderer. Both the victims and the responding officers heard the gunshots.

-There was an extraordinarily rapid police response, but electronic key-card access on the municipal building kept police outside while people died inside. Security doors keep out both the bad guys and the good guys.

-The elevated stairway/entrance prevented a terrorist from crashing a vehicle into the main hallway of the municipal building. The stairway also kept first responders from breaking down the doors.

-As expected, no more innocent victims were shot once the murderer faced armed opposition. A good guy with a gun stopped the bad guy with a gun. Does that surprise anyone?

[AlanM]

Now I have another question:
Has it been established that he did, in fact, have and/or us a suppressor?

If it was an actual suppressor, did he LEGALLY own it?

[WRW]

The consensus at this link is that it was manufactured and was legal...the thought process being that it is illegal to disclose tax information and ATFE states that it is bound by law to not answer the question.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/ATF ... 5-2226673/

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[WRW]

https://gunsources.com/concealed-carry-at-work/

"In my state, Kansas, for example, the state extends immunity from liability to 1) businesses which allow concealed handguns in the workplace and 2) those that don’t, except that an employer that prohibits weapons is only immune if it “provides adequate security measures.” Kan. Stat. Ann. §75-7c10(c)(1)."

For the question...Does this sound reasonable?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[domin8ss]

Now I have another question:
Has it been established that he did, in fact, have and/or us a suppressor?

If it was an actual suppressor, did he LEGALLY own it?

Reports out of Virginia Beach claimed he had it legally

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk