Father and son die in shootout at Pearl County gun shop.

[Crowman1979]

Source: Sun Herald

BY WESLEY MULLER
[email protected] Twitter: WesleySMuller

PICAYUNE -- A father and son were killed in a shootout with another man and his son at a gun store Saturday in Pearl River County's Henleyfield community.

Pearl River County deputies responding to the shooting on Mississippi 43 about 3:15 p.m. found the store owner and his son dead in the store, Chief Deputy Shane Tucker said.

The owner's wife was working at the store when two customers, a man and his son, entered to pick up a firearm that had been repaired.

Read more here: http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/crime/article56305535.html#storylink=cpy

Read more: http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/crime/article56305535.html

---

So who is the good guy with the gun here?

[Karma13612]

1. Sigh. eom

[MariaThinks]

2. the nra vision coming true

everyone was armed, people still died.

[greenman3610]

10. "an armed society is a polite society"

[marble falls]

3. Four good guys with guns shoot four bad guys with guns?

[Hoyt]

4. Law-abiding gun owners, same kind that walk among us daily on city streets.

[Karma13612]

18. and the drunk ones who 'accidentally' shoot people in movie theaters.

[-none]

19. All gunners are law abiding, until they aren't.

Then they are disowned by their own - i.e., those whose turn hasn't come yet.
Talk about your transparency. The gunner's line is so transparent, everyone except the gunners can see right through it.

[Hoyt]

32. Exactly, as far as I'm concerned, 99% of toters are just a Zimmerman waiting to happen.

[-none]

47. That is the way I read the gunners.

Unrealistic fantasies on saving the day or themselves, until the shoot an innocent victim or a supped love one.
No wonder they are so against background checks that include mental health evaluations.

[beevul]

57. Except that we know that the supermajority remain so.

All gunners are law abiding, until they aren't. Then they are disowned by their own - i.e., those whose turn hasn't come yet.

Except that we know that the supermajority remain so. Statistically.


So let me fix this for you:

Then they are disowned by those whose turn will never come.

Kinda blows whatever point you thought you had right out of the water.

[randr]

5. Darwin scores again

[xocet]

30. "He shoots! He scores!" ? n/t

[randr]

33. Evolutionary my friend

Only the fittest survive. Human stupidity will guarantee our evolution into a peaceful species.

[navarth]

34. We can hope, I guess...unless the environment's so ruined it doesn't matter by then.

[randr]

37. This is our current challenge

Let's hope we are up to it.

[navarth]

39. cautious optimism here.

[lark]

6. Total myth

The more guns the more murders, period the end.

[cantbeserious]

7. A Prelude To Reenacting The Ok Corral

eom

[abelenkpe]

8. Over 25 dollars!

Tragic.

[avebury]

26. Exacty

Four morons who don't have enough sense get into a shoot out over $25.

I don't really have that much sympathy for any of them. And these are kind of people that the NRA fight to arm.

[humbled_opinion]

9. Should give us an idea of what

daily life in Trump's open carry society looks like.

[Tarc]

11. Trump voters

[stillwaiting]

15. Hope so. nt

[exboyfil]

52. According to Facebook the father customer was one

here is his Facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/audymccool


His son has ammoporn prominently displayed on his Facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/mccool24?hc_location=ufi&pnref=story

Teflon bullets and a nice picture with Grandpa holding semiauto rifles.

[rjsquirrel]

12. Where are the RKBA folks huh?

Even on DU they obnoxiously assert that this doesn't happen and everyone walking around with a 9mm semi on their hip is just fine.

Yet it seems to be happening all the time. A lot of guys with anger issues packing heat, what could possibly go wrong?

The good thing is if this keeps happening in gun nut places we may get some gun nut population control courtesy of open carry. Shame about the innocents and kids though. But if you carry and get killed despite doin so for your "protection" ask me how much I give a shit. With any luck they will cull their own numbers over time and we can get back to a post-frontier society.

Hell this one took out an entire numbnut bloodline. Over a $25 charge. Too bad so sad.

[safeinOhio]

22. Too busy defending NRA talking points.

[left-of-center2012]

13. "Stupid is as stupid does" n/t

[Aristus]

14. When it happens to innocent people, it's a tragedy.

When it happens to gun-humpers, it's a self-correction.

[valerief]

16. Live by the sword...

[tabasco]

17. Just the "well regulated militia" doing its thing. n/t

[-none]

20. That part is written in invisible ink.

The last half of that phrase is the only Right they recognized in the Constitution.

[beevul]

58. At least they know where its located.

The last half of that phrase is the only Right they recognized in the Constitution

At least they know where its located.

Amendment 2 isn't in The Constitution.

Its in The Bill of Rights.

Yes Virginia, there is a difference.

Oh, and its 'protected' not 'recognized.

Read the preamble some time why don't you...

[-none]

64. You've been talking to Sarah Palin again haven't you?

We probable differ on the definition of "We the people..." and "general welfare" also.

BTY, the Bill of Rights is part of the Constitution. They are added Amendments to the Constitution. So no, there is not a difference. Ratified Amendments make them a part of the Constitution
The 2nd Amendment is not as protected as you might think. One Supreme Court decision can make all the difference in the world. Just one. As it is Heller does not protect an absolute Right as you seem to think. There are many restrictions.

The gun control law at issue in the Heller case—a nearly across-the-board gun ban in the District of Columbia—was considered to be the strictest gun control law in the nation. Although the Supreme Court's decision adopted the broader, individual-rights interpretation of the Second Amendment, the Court made it clear that the right to own a gun continues to have a number of significant qualifications or restrictions. The Court indicated that the Second Amendment continues to allow for limits on guns like the following:

Not everyone can own a gun. The right can be withheld from felons and the mentally ill.
Guns cannot be carried everywhere. Laws forbidding individuals from carrying firearms in "sensitive" places, such as schools and government buildings, will probably stand.
Certain restrictions on the sale of guns are allowed. Laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of firearms will most likely stand.
Individuals do not have the right to carry certain types of guns. The right does not protect guns that are not generally owned for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns. (The Court endorsed the "the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of 'dangerous and unusual weapons.'&quot
Concealed weapons. Laws forbidding people to carry concealed weapons on their person (or in a place close at hand, such as the glove compartment of a car) probably remain valid.
Sentence enhancements. A variety of criminal laws provide for increased punishment of offenders who use weapons when committing a crime. Heller does not affect the validity of these laws.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/right-own-gun-under-heller-30295.html

[beevul]

68. You must be new at this.

BTY, the Bill of Rights is part of the Constitution. They are added Amendments to the Constitution. So no, there is not a difference.

They are separate and distinct documents. That's not even debatable. Amendment 2 is located in one of them, but not the other. If you read both documents ultra carefully, I am confident you'll figure it out, in time.

The 2nd Amendment is not as protected as you might think.

Well, that's an admission that I was correct. The word is protected, not 'recognized'.

Like I said, you must be new at this.

As it is Heller does not protect an absolute Right as you seem to think.

Did you think you could just attribute to me, a sentiment which I've not expressed, and not be called on it? I mean...its cute, and I'm flattered that you'd try, but that tactic is as old and stale as sarah brady.

On the other hand, amendment 2 is not as pink with purple polkadots as YOU seem to think. Wait, you say you didn't claim anything that indicates that you think amendment 2 is pink with purple polkadots?

Gee, I made no claim that amendment 2 is absolute either.

See how that works?

Oh, and heres the preamble I was referring to:

THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution

http://billofrights.org/


Get back to me when you're able to understand what that says and means.

No, I take that back.

Get back to me when you have more than insults and misrepresentations, AND you're able to understand what that says and means.

[xocet]

31. At least they kept the gunfight inside the gun store. If only that example were followed more often.

n/t

[Sancho]

21. People Control, Not Gun Control

This is my generic response to gun threads where people are shot and killed by the dumb or criminal possession of guns. For the record, I grew up in the South and on military bases. I was taught about firearms as a child, and I grew up hunting, was a member of the NRA, and I still own guns. In the 70’s, I dropped out of the NRA because they become more radical and less interested in safety and training. Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and posses a gun no matter how illogical it was for them to have a gun. Also, easy access to more powerful guns, guns in the hands of children, and guns that weren’t secured are out of control in our society. As such, here’s what I now think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. I’m not debating the legal language, I just think it’s the reasonable way to stop the shootings. Notice, none of this restricts the type of guns sold. This is aimed at the people who shoot others, because it’s clear that they should never have had a gun.

1.) Anyone in possession of a gun (whether they own it or not) should have a regularly renewed license. If you want to call it a permit, certificate, or something else that's fine.
2.) To get a license, you should have a background check, and be examined by a professional for emotional and mental stability appropriate for gun possession. It might be appropriate to require that examination to be accompanied by references from family, friends, employers, etc. This check is not to subject you to a mental health diagnosis, just check on your superficial and apparent gun-worthyness.
3.) To get the license, you should be required to take a safety course and pass a test appropriate to the type of gun you want to use.
4.) To get a license, you should be over 21. Under 21, you could only use a gun under direct supervision of a licensed person and after obtaining a learner’s license. Your license might be restricted if you have children or criminals or other unsafe people living in your home. (If you want to argue 18 or 25 or some other age, fine. 21 makes sense to me.)
5.) If you possess a gun, you would have to carry a liability insurance policy specifically for gun ownership - and likely you would have to provide proof of appropriate storage, security, and whatever statistical reasons that emerge that would drive the costs and ability to get insurance.
6.) You could not purchase a gun or ammunition without a license, and purchases would have a waiting period.
7.) If you possess a gun without a license, you go to jail, the gun is impounded, and a judge will have to let you go (just like a DUI).
8.) No one should carry an unsecured gun (except in a locked case, unloaded) when outside of home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. Their license should indicate training and special carry circumstances beyond recreational shooting (security guard, etc.). If you are carrying your gun while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, you lose your gun and license.
9.) If you buy, sell, give away, or inherit a gun, your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, get referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, etc., you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a serious relicensing process.

Most of you know that a license is no big deal. Besides a driver’s license you need a license to fish, operate a boat, or many other activities. I realize these differ by state, but that is not a reason to let anyone without a bit of sense pack a semiautomatic weapon in public, on the roads, and in schools. I think we need to make it much harder for some people to have guns.

[Jenny_92808]

27. I couldn't agree more Sancho

Well said!

[navarth]

35. I don't disagree

[vkkv]

40. As a rifle owner I AGREE with this entirely.

And I'd be in favor of only law enforcement being able to own / carry handguns.
Handguns are the worst, and need to be differentiated from rifles in gun control conversations, but they are not.

Bolt action rifles like my CZs? Rarely hear about them involved in crime.

Five round magazines should be a limit as well.

[jmowreader]

44. Not bad. Let's add one more.

11.) Brass control. (The brass is the "container" of a round of ammunition, in that it holds the bullet, powder and primer.) When you buy a gun that fires centerfire ammo you get a permit to own 100 rounds of ammunition, but you can only have permits for 500 rounds of a single caliber. Once you shoot up your ammo, you have to turn in the empty brass to buy more ammo. There is no control on the other components of a round of ammunition, so someone who reloads can continue to do that. A person who already owns a gun can buy for a nominal fee - just enough to pay for the clerk's time - a permit to buy 100 rounds per gun.

People who shoot .22 rimfire will get a permit that allows 2000 rounds per gun without a maximum limit. Those guys shoot a LOT of ammo - sometimes hundreds of rounds a day at paper targets. A .22 wouldn't be any fun if you only had a hundred rounds to shoot. They also have to turn in their empties.

If you shoot in competition you can get a permit for more brass but you'll have to show your results from three matches to get the permit. Until you have the permit, you can police up your brass and take it to the Ammo Crook right outside the range area who'll happily charge you $30 for a $15 box of ammo.

[Sancho]

53. I thought about ammunition....

I've avoided referring to specific guns, ammo, and weapon designs.

I figured if you had to have a license to buy guns or ammo, and had to show a license to hunt, go to the range, or transport; at some point it would also be likely we'll see restrictions on ammo and hardware. You could reload yourself, but you'd likely need to license to buy powder. Eventually the license would keep unsafe people away from guns and ammo I would hope.

If insurance was required, the insurance companies would act as gatekeepers. Just like asking how many miles you drive, they would likely ask how much ammo you buy. If you didn't have a rational reason, you insurance costs would go up.

[Binkie The Clown]

23. Land of the free and home of the gunslingers. n/t

[tom_kelly]

24. Gun totin' good guys ruinit fer the rest! n/t

[SwankyXomb]

25. As always

the bad guy with the gun is the one with the gun.

[Jenny_92808]

28. How did

the bad guy with a gun, get his gun....It took little effort because it is too easy to get the gun.

[SwankyXomb]

29. I'm sure

one of the usual gang of gun scum will be along to gunsplain it, as soon as the talking points are issued.

[trillion]

43. Block em. Make DU fit your liberal needs. It's a way better experience when you start blocking

racists and anti-gun regulation people.

[beevul]

59. You can't explain it to people that already have their minds made up...

You can't explain it to people that already have their minds made up before the facts are even known.

Exhibit A:

...It took little effort ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1323844

Fortunately, folks who might otherwise want to, probably have no desire in this case.

[jmowreader]

45. He probably bought it from the guy he shot

Remember: he was a good guy with a gun until another good guy with a gun wanted him to pay a $25 fee for something, and only then did he become a bad guy with a gun.

[secondwind]

36. We are like the Wild, Wild West.... :-(

[n2doc]

38. Obviously they didn't follow proper gun safety protocol

[sarisataka]

41. Just gun humping

Ammosexual scum ejaculating at each other. No loss, actually helps make the world better. A couple of racist vigilantes won't walk the streets while totin anymore.
Too bad the shop didn't have more customers...




I sshouldn't need to but to be clear-

[Hoyt]

48. We know. Just the cost society has to pay so you can have your gunz.

[sarisataka]

49. What cost

Two racist yahoos will no longer pollute society. Don't you think that is a good thing?

[Hoyt]

50. Well, there was a 17 year old kid involved, and there have been a bunch of 2

year olds killed with objects of gun fanciers' affection.

[beevul]

60. What part are you paying Hoyt?

Besides, shouldn't you be giving instruction on how to field strip a 45 1 handed, underwater, blindfolded, while fending off 3 saltwater crocodiles and a giant anaconda with your pinkie toe and a rubber band?

Or was I thinking of a different self admitted former robber?

[Hoyt]

62. Beevul, society pays a pretty high cost so you can go to the store with a gun or two

strapped on.

[beevul]

67. Society pays a high cost for a lot of things....

Beevul, society pays a pretty high cost so you can go to the store with a gun or two strapped on.

Society pays a high cost for a lot of things, Mister Selective. Where does lawful gun carry place on that list, versus your concern, huh? Gun carry is not at or even near the top, but your concern is.

That by itself is telling.

And, as you've been told and forgotten at least a dozen times now, I don't carry a gun. If you can't be bothered to remember that, or simply choose to ignore it, Your (less than reflective of reality) opinion is of minimal value to any legitimate discussion.

[trillion]

42. I should thank DU for that block button

I don't have to run into anti-gun regulation people here now! It's become a much lovelier site. Thank you DU!

[jtuck004]

46. From the comments section: I wouldn't mind this person as a neighbor at all...

"Full disclosure: I own and build guns. I do not carry a weapon concealed or otherwise. I support the second amendment for its original intent but not as if it were the second commandment. "

http://www.sunherald.com/news/local/crime/article56305535.html#storylink=cpy

[ProfessorGAC]

65. That Comment Section Was A CF

Talk about going nowhere fast!

[jtuck004]

66. That's what they are most places. Including here, it seems. n/t

[OregonBlue]

51. The up side of gun nuttery.

[onehandle]

54. Common gun culture event. nt

[beevul]

61. How many shootings in a gun store annually?

2? 10?

Define "common" in a nation of 300 million people.

[friendly_iconoclast]

69. Your question was dodged because a correct answer would not help their crusade

[maxsolomon]

70. Perhaps they didn't mean specifically in a Gun Shop

but rather a verbal argument between males that escalates into gunfire.

THAT is fairly common. more common than mass shootings, I'd guess.

[Little Tich]

55. Tragic.

One may question the wisdom in starting a gunfight in a gun shop, but it's still tragic.

[liberalfromaustin21]

56. Yet another senseless tragedy involving guns

When will this madness end? In any case, RIP to both victims.

[Skittles]

63. idiots