"Six Killed, 3 Wounded in Shooting in Southern CA"

Post Reply New Topic

Guns should temporarly be suspended from people going through divorce procedures... <.< Obviously violence was not the right way to solve this...

Well, Saturday, 12:15 PM, and now the total is 8 dead...one of the stylists was washing her own mother's hair..the stylist was shot and killed, her mother watched her die, and gets to live with that memory for the rest of her life. In addition, there was a pause in the shooting, before it started again. He re-loaded. Sylkat

Wow. How horrible to watch your own child die in such a violent manner. I'm not usually a proponent of killing people, but I think that if this guy walked into the hair salon knowing full well what he was doing, wearing a bulletproof vest, and reloading his gun in the process, that he should get the death penalty. Either that or life in prison without parole. We don't need people like that walking on the street. We can't really do anything about the people he stole lives from, but I think it would be a tragic injustice to let this guy walk free.

My pastor was talking about it. This world is getting worser by the mintune.

Please no conspiratorial doom-visions, people. We should talk about solving problems, not making some exegesis about the world getting worse by the minute when it isn't.

except, its not. On the whole the world is becoming less violent.

This is so easy to shoot full of holes I don’t even know where to start.

So guns are violence and violence is guns?
First off, going through a divorce should not be grounds for suspending someone’s rights. Very few of those going through divorce actually resort to violence, anyway.
Divorce proceedings my never really come to a close in effect when you take child custody battles into account which can drag on for several years and become very nasty and stressful.
How do you go about suspending guns anyway?
Barring people going through divorce the acquisition of them?
Do you raid people’s houses for them?
If someone borrows, steals, buys one through sources other than a licensed dealer, or has a hidden stash then that law just became ineffective for all practical purposes.
What if another means of assault are used? Dead is still dead. Would you feel better if someone had thier head stoved in with a ball peen hammer?
If one party does come after the other with some kind of deadly weapon then the other party is now limited by law in their means to defend themselves. A small woman wouldn't stand a chance against a strong man with a lead pipe, knife, or hammer.

This is a start but I can expand on anything that I’ve written.

What an ironic metaphor.


Nobody said that.


I think it was meant in a humorous way.


And so create a fissile environment where violence may be used. One doth hurt ones case.


Ask then to turn in their guns as a matter of course. Often people aren't as rediculously agressive as to try and fight someone.


Please don't.

"Please don't" is the worst thing to say to me because it guarantees that I will.

And just because it's you.......

If the shoe doesn't fit, imagine that it does.


He said Guns should temporarily be suspended for people during divorce. Selective quotation. Also that isn't saying some hilarious equalizing toutology like you did.


It was a joke? Is that easy enough for you to understand?


Well since people don't spend the rest of their lives in divorce proceeding it is temporary.


Just because you're a humbugging idiot who likes to act like a dangerous anarchist because screw the law and reason! I wunt muh gunz!


This coming from the person who can't even keep track of when something is meant to be temporary or not.


That's unfortunate. I guess unlike narcotics when you keep a gun it's only your problem though. So if they do catch you it's not like shipping drugs, because you're not causing thousands of people to get hooked.


Did I just refer to the USA as a specific case? I don't know why you're trying to make a pass at some strange old internationalist thing when I refer to America. But to be honest there's a problem with people complaining about raiding someone's house for guns if they accept that people can do it for less. The problem isn't two wrongs anyway, it's consistency.


Lots of people try to circumvent the law and are punished for it. That's how the law works. That people will circumvent it is not a good reason for why the law shouldn't be in place.


You didn't read me. If it's wrong to let someone have something with another use, as you said, then why should we let them have a gun at the time?


No, I didn't say a gun has to be used for murder just because. Why don't you stop psychotically assuming what I think? I said a gun is used for shooting, and by extension killing. That doesn't mean what you said. Well actually you went in to several different things too. You said about the ball-peen hammer, and then also dodging giving your guns in, and furthermore you talked about the hypothetical possibility of a man killing a woman in a gunless environment. So yes, you did go on about it.

You've made so many examples that you have examples up the ass. And all this doesn't avoid he fact that when it comes to violence a gun is quicker and generally more easy. So by extension it'll increase the chances and thus the incedence of dead people from familial violence. I don't mind weapons one bit. The existence of guns is fine. What I have a problem with is people getting the chance to use the will-ee nill-ee



Oh yeah, I forgot that you were a sociopath with no sense of shame.

Well I'm not going to hit each one again because I already have.
My point is that a divorce isn't grounds to suspend someone's rights.
That equates to assumed guilt more than anything.

If you want to believe in more government, more regulation, and fewer individual liberties (when it suits your agenda) then go right ahead but I won't be a part of that world.

And just because shameless sociopaths are nothing if not thorough;

Indeed, I shouldn't stop a person under stressful circumstances from using a weapon because it would infringe on a right of his or hers to own a weapon. Not that the larger and more important concern is making sure that nobody blows anyone's guts out during divorce proceedings, or that we are making a lifetime ban like you somehow suggested earlier.


Don't stuff words in my mouth. Back off and keep to real arguments than whinging about some tired, irrelevant theme of big government. If it weren't for government your rights would be a piece of paper to wipe someone's arse with.


And shameless! Don't forget hokey either.

I dont think banning guns would work because if some one wants to kill....they will do it anyway.
However, I think something needs to be done about domestic violence during divorce and child custudy.

First off as I said before a domestic abuser is the most dangerous when he or she is losing control of the family and relationship.
These things rarely come up out of the blue. There are warning signs.
There needs to be programs in place that help domestic abuse victims get away from their abusers. Some police forces have created police escorted getaway plans and work with abuse shelters to help relocate the victims and in some cases provide change of name and idenity.

I think they should take things a step further and those who have been found guilty of domestic abuse in the court of law should be put on a watch list like the sexual offenders registry. Abusers will continue to abuse regardless of who they are with. Many are preditoral in how they hunt for women who have issues with self esteem and a lack of assertiveness. They are quick to marry, and the abuser often convinces the victim into having children early in the relationship to make escape much harder and to use the kids as leverage.
They often keep the victim from working or make working diffucult by calling constantly and try to get the victim fired. Once unemployed, the abuser often keeps the victim penniless to keep them from saving money to escape.
Abuse often begins by seperating the victim from their friends and family, then making the victim totally dependant on the abuser.
Then the actual abuse begins...and there is an ebb and flow to it.
sometimes it gets really bad and the abuser feels bad and backs off and says they will stop etcetc, then the abuse returns but only worse than before, when a crisis point is reached...it is worse than before, all the promices to stop, then it returns but only gets worse.
However, the most dangerous time for the victim and the family is when the victim and the family are trying to escape the abuser.

But like I said there are tale-tell signs that an abuser is about to become dangerous...often involving a pattern of escelation, or a antisipated loss of control. Like in the case of these murders, the child custudy case was probably not going in his favor.

But many dangerous abusers are serial abusers with a pattern throughout a lifetime of abusing and even killing their victims. I know one guy here in town that is very abusive, he ran over and killed his first wife, refused to let his second wife get treatment for cancer and she died...he also physically abused her while she was dying on cancer. Now he is onto wife number 3.
He has never been tried for the murders of his former wives because he is well connected in the community and much feared.

There needs to be a domestic abuser registry just as there is a sexual abuser registry.
If they kept closer tabs on these perps then things like this could be avoided.
But getting rid of guns during divorce is short sighted and does not solve the real problem which is the epidemic of domestic abuse in the US.

But like I said,
the number 1 killer of women under 40 is domestic abuse, over 40...is undiagnosed heart disease. Women of all ages die of a broken heart.

Jojo

Dear Jojobean, Did you know that Topeka, Kansas has decriminalized domestic abuse to save money? I am not joking, Google it...Sylkat

that is sick. I am sure there are better ways to save money than on the backs of abuse victims.


Jojo

I live in Huntington Beach, CA which is directly next to Seal Beach, CA. You never know about things like this until it hits right next to you. That's just sad.