HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » The Pensacola gunman boug...

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 01:30 PM

The Pensacola gunman bought his weapon legally, sources say

Source: CNN

(CNN)The Saudi officer legally bought the gun he used to kill three sailors at Naval Air Station Pensacola in Florida, according to two law enforcement sources.

One source said Mohammed Alshamrani purchased the weapon from a gun store earlier this year.

He obtained a hunting license, which allows a non-immigrant on a non-immigrant visa to purchase a gun, the source said.

Meanwhile, investigators have been trying to determine what motivated Alshamrani to open fire in a classroom building on Friday. He used a handgun and was killed after two deputies exchanged gunfire with him.

<more>

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/08/us/pensacola-naval-station-shooting-sunday/index.html

56 replies, 3056 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 56 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Pensacola gunman bought his weapon legally, sources say (Original post)
jpak Dec 8 OP
IronLionZion Dec 8 #1
TheBlackAdder Dec 8 #30
IronLionZion Dec 8 #31
magicarpet Dec 8 #2
imavoter Dec 8 #23
magicarpet Dec 8 #27
ancianita Dec 8 #3
Igel Dec 8 #33
ancianita Dec 8 #35
lapfog_1 Dec 8 #4
IronLionZion Dec 8 #5
Kaleva Dec 8 #6
Grins Dec 8 #9
jmowreader Dec 8 #10
jpak Dec 8 #13
jmowreader Dec 8 #14
EX500rider Dec 8 #17
jpak Dec 8 #18
Tom Yossarian Joad Dec 8 #22
EX500rider Dec 15 #53
jpak Dec 15 #54
EX500rider Dec 16 #55
jpak Dec 17 #56
imavoter Dec 8 #24
Hoyt Dec 8 #26
jpak Dec 14 #49
Evolve Dammit Dec 8 #16
Igel Dec 8 #34
Marengo Dec 9 #37
inwiththenew Dec 9 #39
IronLionZion Dec 9 #41
NickB79 Dec 13 #48
jpak Dec 14 #50
NickB79 Dec 14 #52
Sancho Dec 8 #7
James48 Dec 8 #8
Miigwech Dec 8 #11
ck4829 Dec 13 #46
madville Dec 8 #12
jpak Dec 8 #19
madville Dec 8 #20
jpak Dec 8 #21
Kaleva Dec 8 #25
NutmegYankee Dec 8 #29
Kaleva Dec 9 #38
NutmegYankee Dec 9 #40
Kaleva Dec 9 #42
NutmegYankee Dec 9 #43
TwilightZone Dec 8 #28
marble falls Dec 8 #15
ck4829 Dec 13 #47
Initech Dec 8 #32
Turbineguy Dec 9 #36
58Sunliner Dec 11 #44
ck4829 Dec 13 #45
keithbvadu2 Dec 14 #51

Response to jpak (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 01:49 PM

1. Republicans will solve this with immigrant control instead of gun control

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IronLionZion (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 09:35 PM

30. So, hunting is the excuse foreigners can use to buy a handgun?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #30)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 10:09 PM

31. ATF website has some answers to this

https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/nonimmigrant-aliens

May a nonimmigrant alien who has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa possess a firearm or ammunition in the United States?
An alien admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa is prohibited from shipping, transporting, receiving, or possessing a firearm or ammunition unless the alien falls within one of the exceptions provided in 18 U.S.C. 922(y)(2), such as: a valid hunting license or permit, admitted for lawful hunting or sporting purposes, certain official representatives of a foreign government, or a foreign law enforcement officer of a friendly foreign government entering the United States on official law enforcement business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 01:53 PM

2. Is this common that county deputies were,....

.... brought in. As a US military base I would have thought it was the domain of military police exclusively.

I'm confused.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magicarpet (Reply #2)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 08:30 PM

23. I read the article...

I don't see where it said County deputies...
I can't speak for all of the military, but I know the Navy has a police force staffed by civilians. the base police.
Might have been them. I don't know if they work for the DOD directly or per the Navy, but anyway...
They are police officers and not military members.

The article could be a little more clear. Maybe we can find it somewhere else.


Edit: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pensacola-shooting-update-fbi-working-with-the-presumption-this-was-an-act-of-terrorism-2019-12-08/
I don't have an answer for you on that one. Maybe Florida does it differently? Or they could have been on base already. It says it was a classroom, so they would have been on base already, I'm assuming.
At first I was thinking maybe it was outside the gate.

Maybe someone else in the hive mind will know.

here: I found it.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/12/06/nas-pensacola-shooting-deputies-responded-bravery-and-grit/4361171002/
"A spokesman for NAS Pensacola said that the Navy and local law enforcement have a partnership in place to do joint active shooter response drills and to assist each other during major incidents."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imavoter (Reply #23)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 09:00 PM

27. The article says,...

(snip)

....Alshamrani was killed after two
****deputies****exchanged gunfire with him.....

########

(snip)

.......****Escambia County Sheriff David Morgan ****told CNN that the FBI had secured the areas on base where the shooter was staying,.......

#######
Both snips above are from the CNN article attached to the DU Original Post. The article seems to be saying the perp was shot by deputies. Question is: were these deputies that shot the perp from the Escambia County Sheriff's Office. It surprised me that the county sheriff would be the primary first responder on federal property. I would expect the first responder to be the federal military police being this is a federal facility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 02:02 PM

3. What say you, Matt DUI Gaetz? Hmm? How do two licensed gun stores do a background check on a SAUDI?

1. Florida has no law generally requiring a background check on the purchaser of a firearm when the seller is not a licensed dealer.

2. Florida law does not require firearms sellers to retain records of sales or report those sales to law enforcement, although a provision of Florida law requires records of handgun sales to be available for inspection by any law enforcement agency during normal business hours.

3. Did Alshamrani buy from two gun sources -- one on base and another off base?

4. FL law contributes toward military deaths.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 10:54 PM

33. Neither's unusual.

And neither would raise flags. In this case, a licensed dealer apparently sold the gun (so a background check would have been run).

Background checks don't report back "success" they just report back "fail." Lack of "fail" means "sale approved." The background checker doesn't have complete knowledge, and can't, so all s/he can do is report whether there's something blocking the sale.

It's standard for nobody to report sales of guns to a central authority. There is no central registry. I guess if the background check folk kept records, that would almost sort-of count. (They'd have records of the check, but there's no need for the sale to be completed.)

Moreover, if the sale had been reported do we really want somebody looking them over and saying, "Gee, national origin. I'm gonna be *sure* to be extra vigilant with people from SA." That is discrimination based on national origin. Progressives used to dislike that kind of discrimination. Or maybe, "Hmmm ... Muslim name. Yeah, gotta look out for those Muslims." Shades of Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Igel (Reply #33)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 11:16 PM

35. No, we don't want to think about a damned thing. Just let happen what happened. Oh well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 02:08 PM

4. how does getting a hunting license allow you to buy a handgun?

who goes "hunting" with a handgun?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 02:24 PM

5. The 2nd amendment is not for hunting. It's for resisting tyranny from government

oh wait

Or at least that's what NRA supporters have always claimed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 02:24 PM

6. In much of lower Mi, one can only hunt deer with a handgun or shotgun

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 02:39 PM

9. The Mafia....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 04:49 PM

10. LOTS of people hunt with handguns

I know people who ONLY hunt with handguns - .44 Magnum Ruger Redhawks and Smith & Wesson Model 29s. If you hunt in heavy brush, a rifle is nothing but a pain in the ass to deal with. A .44 Magnum will effectively kill deer and black bears.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmowreader (Reply #10)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 05:25 PM

13. I've hunted for nearly 50 years and never saw one in the woods

Nope

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #13)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 06:00 PM

14. It may be a regional thing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to EX500rider (Reply #17)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 07:04 PM

18. I didn't click on the link.

But I'm pretty sure it's a picture of dumbasses who think they are hunting.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #18)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 07:33 PM

22. Actually jt is a link to google images under the search term "hunting with pistols"

And shows pistols and hunters posing with their trophies so you are essentially correct,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #18)

Sun Dec 15, 2019, 02:19 PM

53. "it's a picture of dumbasses who think they are hunting."

Actually if they got the animal they were hunting for, they didn't "think they are hunting" but actually were hunting.

In case you are still confused:
hunt∑ing
/ˈhən(t)iNG/
noun
1.
the activity of hunting wild animals or game, especially for food or sport.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EX500rider (Reply #53)

Sun Dec 15, 2019, 05:23 PM

54. How do you know they weren't shot with rifles

It's not like these idiots are above "fudging" for the camera.

I won't look at it.

Nope

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #54)

Mon Dec 16, 2019, 10:36 AM

55. Do you really think all hunting it only done with rifles?

Hunting has been done with traps, clubs, atlatl's, spears, slings, slingshots, bows and handguns. And somewhere around the world still being done with most of those.


I won't look at it.

Nope

Sure, sure, wouldn't want contrary information now would you?

https://www.fieldandstream.com/best-handguns-deer-hunting/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #54)

Tue Dec 17, 2019, 03:44 PM

56. Putin and the NRA and the stupid gun nuts say it's OK for foreign terrorists to buy guns

to kill American Navy personnel.

They

Are

All

For

It

Just sayin'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jmowreader (Reply #10)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 08:31 PM

24. The hunters I know have their rifles and shotguns, but

always have a side arm on themselves just in case...snakes, etc...
and hell, in Texas, the ferrel hogs are so mean, you shouldn't go hunting without a side arm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imavoter (Reply #24)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 08:53 PM

26. A lot of them think they might be attacked by gangs deep in the woods, same reason they

tote in town, irrational as it is. Commonly cited reason for public toting: One has to be prepared for the gangs in South Chicago, although they are nowhere near South Chicago and have never even been there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imavoter (Reply #24)

Sat Dec 14, 2019, 05:08 PM

49. I lived in Texas for nearly 5 years - hiked and camped and hunted all over

I and my Texas native friends were not concerned by snakes or hogs.

And a deer rifle can't handle a feral hog better than a handgun? WTF

But I guarantee that more Texans are killed each year by handguns than by snakes and hogs in 2 decades.

Or more

Yup

But let's give foreign terrorists free access to handguns in FL.

Woo Hoo!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 06:32 PM

16. I actually know some who do, but I share your exasperation over our current anemic gun laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 10:56 PM

34. Depends what you're hunting.

And how you hunt.

In Oregon a lot of hunters shot at deer with a rifle. But they carried a handgun to dispatch any wounded animal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 9, 2019, 01:21 AM

37. I have, with a scoped .44 Ruger Redhawk

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 9, 2019, 08:54 AM

39. People do here in Ohio

You are prohibited from using necked rifle cartridges here. You can only use straight walled cartridges or shotguns. I have family who hunt and they mostly use shotguns but I know some who have taken a deer with 44 magnum. Still most people probably use a shotgun around here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 9, 2019, 10:11 AM

41. NRA always claimed the 2nd amendment was for shooting military soldiers

So I doubt any of them would see the irony here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapfog_1 (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 13, 2019, 07:32 AM

48. I went deer hunting with a friend a few yr ago. He brought a Glock

Looked up the regulations, and it was legal in 10mm, which he was using.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #48)

Sat Dec 14, 2019, 05:08 PM

50. And how many deer did he put in the freezer?

Do tell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #50)

Sat Dec 14, 2019, 09:30 PM

52. None that year, but I got skunked too. He got a nice doe the year after though

Ballistically it's as powerful as a .357 Mag, and he had a 1X micro red dot in the rear sight slot, so accuracy was very good to 75 yd. Since it's shotgun-only in our area, that wasn't a handicap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 02:27 PM

7. People Control, Not Gun Control

Some personal experiences where people I know were involved in shootings caused me to realize that anyone could obtain and possess 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 werenít secured are out of control in our society. As such, hereís what I think ought to be the requirements to possess a gun. Iím not debating the legal language; I just think itís 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 itís clear that they should never have had a gun.

1.) Anyone in possession of a gun 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 or 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-worthiness.
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 learnerís 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.)
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 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 your home. Guns should be secure when transporting to a shooting event without demonstrating a special need. The 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, lose, manufacture, modify, or inherit a gun; your license information should be recorded.
10.) If you accidentally discharge your gun, commit a crime, are referred by a mental health professional, are served a restraining order, or deemed unsafe by a LEO; you should lose your license and guns until reinstated by a relicensing process.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 02:31 PM

8. Any alien admitted legally can buy a gun.

Itís not limited to those with a hunting license.

By Florida law ( and federal law) , all you have to have is an airplane I-94 ďArrival RecordĒ card showing you are in the country legally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 05:07 PM

11. Of course he did. This the United Gun States of America. Grab a gun no matter what

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Miigwech (Reply #11)

Fri Dec 13, 2019, 07:17 AM

46. Yep

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 05:17 PM

12. Legal immigrants are protected by the Constitution

The Supreme Court has ruled on this several times, Constitutional protections like the right to free speech, protection against illegal search and seizure and even the right to bear arms are extended to legal immigrants, not just citizens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 07:06 PM

19. In this case - the 2nd A didn't protect American service personnel

But it did protect a terrorist's "right to bear arms".

Yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #19)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 07:22 PM

20. American service personnel don't have Constitutional rights

See if they have freedom of speech, 4th amendment, or 2nd amendment rights on a military installation. The answer is no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #20)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 07:24 PM

21. I'm pretty sure they do - because they swore an oath to protect it

Last edited Sun Dec 8, 2019, 08:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #21)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 08:49 PM

25. They have some but not all of the rights

Living on a ship, anyone in a position of authority over me could search my rack, lockers and personal belongings without a warrant. There are limits to free speech and the right to assemble. Also, freedom from billeting soldiers does not apply. Freedom of religion might also be curtailed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #25)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 09:34 PM

29. They have all the same rights.

They just contractually agreed to limit them while serving. Youíll find most places of work allow searches of desks and lockers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NutmegYankee (Reply #29)

Mon Dec 9, 2019, 07:39 AM

38. So if they are limted, then they cannot be the same.

I did not work at the barracks I lived in while attending school nor did I work in the berthing compartment where I lived while serving on a ship. This is different then college dorm rooms which are generally considered a ďresidenceĒ and are afforded the same protections against Fourth Amendment violations as a stand-alone house. A warrant is required to enter and/or search a dorm room unless consent is given or exigent circumstances present themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #38)

Mon Dec 9, 2019, 09:21 AM

40. I served as an RA, dorms had weak 4th Amendment protections.

Again, all part of the contractual agreement. Apartments can sometimes have inspections as agreed to in the lease. The highest protections are individual homes, where you are the owner.

The two examples listed, barracks and berthing spaces on a vessel are both provided as part of the employment agreement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NutmegYankee (Reply #40)

Mon Dec 9, 2019, 11:54 AM

42. Can you provide a link to this employment agreement that you speak of?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #42)

Mon Dec 9, 2019, 02:10 PM

43. Look up any enlistment document, such as the DD Form 4/1.

https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/forms/dd/dd0004.pdf

The terms state you agree to change status from civilian to member of armed forces and subject yourself to the military code of justice. Implicit is that you can now be subjected to inspections for equipment and good order that civilians donít have to endure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 09:05 PM

28. Sounds like he wasn't an immigrant.

The article and the OP both mention that a couple of times.

"He obtained a hunting license, which allows a non-immigrant on a non-immigrant visa to purchase a gun, the source said."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 06:07 PM

15. Well in that case everything is just peachy keen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marble falls (Reply #15)

Fri Dec 13, 2019, 07:18 AM

47. Move along, nothing to see here

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2019, 10:37 PM

32. Thanks NRA!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Mon Dec 9, 2019, 12:10 AM

36. And he operated it correctly

and for its intended purpose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Wed Dec 11, 2019, 01:46 PM

44. Another domestic terror attack. Thanks religion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Fri Dec 13, 2019, 07:17 AM

45. Of course he did

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Sat Dec 14, 2019, 05:38 PM

51. NRA gets their way so terrorists can legally buy guns.

NRA gets their way so terrorists can legally buy guns.

The NRA used to be for sportsmen, hunters and gun safety.

Now it has become an industry owned shill for the sale of more guns and the enrichment of its leaders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread