Man shoots 4 people, self at San Bernardino, Calif., Del Taco; 2 dead including 8-yr-old boy

[The Straight Story]

Man shoots 4 people, self at San Bernardino, Calif., Del Taco; 2 dead including 8-yr-old boy; gunman in hospital - AP

http://twitter.com/BreakingNews

[Bluebear]

1. If everyone eating at Del Taco was armed this wouldn't happen.

:crazy:

[patrice]

2. Right! It would probably be more than 4.

You can shoot 4 people in one place awful fast, so it would be real hard to stop.

[Skip Intro]

5. Or it could have been less...

Someone legally carrying could have stopped him after his first shot...

[patrice]

10. Yes, but which is more likely?

[Skip Intro]

12. Well, I'm not sure. Someone legally carrying will have had training, so...

if such a patron shot back, it seems more likely than not that it would be an effective shot, thereby stopping the assailant. Or so it seems to me. I know that in such a situation, I'd rather be armed than not.

[Euromutt]

34. Why don't you tell us?

Be sure to provide empirical evidence to support your argument, and try to avoid presenting biased speculation as if it were fact.

[RC]

11. After missing the first 5 times because of the adrenalin...

[Skip Intro]

13. Or after hitting the assailant the first time because of training...

:shrug:

[PavePusher]

26. Legal gun carriers, acting in defense of self or others...

have a pretty good track record of NOT raising the body count.

Unless you have statistically meaningful evidence to the contrary, of course...?

[elocs]

8. I am waiting for somebody from our very own Gungeon to suggest the 8 year old should've been armed.

Wait for it.

[cowman]

16. What a moronic statement

no one here has ever suggested that children should be armed.

[provis99]

17. are you opposed to children have the right to defend themselves?

They are smaller and weaker than an adult. Having a big gun is an equalizer for an 8 year old.

[benEzra]

20. No, but I think their parents should have had the choice to get training and a carry license.

Not possible in California though, unless you are either wealthy, politically connected, or want to protect a corporation's assets. Even if they knew this violent loser was stalking them---which is possible---they probably didn't have enough dollar signs associated with their family to qualify for a carry license in CA.

[cowman]

25. And we all know

your attitude towards guns and gun owners and your moronic posts here

[Travis Coates]

19. The 8 year old should have been armed

Are you happy now?

[GreenStormCloud]

22. You will have a very long wait. N/T

[Travis Coates]

23. Nah, I went ahead and said it to make him happy

Want to lay odds he comes back and says I was serious?

[slackmaster]

29. Only a fucking idiot would seriously suggest such a thing

:hi:

[Euromutt]

33. Actually, what is more likely is that somebody will trot out that particular straw man

Oh wait, you already did. I consider my point proven.

It's odd, but I don't think I've ever actually encountered an RKBA (Right to Keep and Bear Arms) proponent who ever asserted that everything would have been fine if only the victim(s) had been armed. I've only ever read that claim as an RKBA opponent's "prediction" of what an RKBA proponent would say.

Now, I have heard RKBA proponents arguing that the victim should have been legally permitted to be armed, so as to have a better chance of successfully fighting back, if they so choose. Note, however, that "a better chance" ≠ "guaranteed success". Guns aren't magic talismans that ward off harm by their mystical powers, and very few RKBA proponents would assert that they are.

So there's a subtle but important difference between the two arguments, and that difference is what distinguishes an accurate representation from a straw man. And there's always somebody (usually several somebodies) who trots out the straw man, isn't there? I console myself with the thought that if that the evident need to do so means that there aren't any actual arguments to be made.

[SteveM]

38. keep waiting. And waiting. And waiting.

We're waiting for your wait.

[davidinalameda]

14. if they weren't eating at Del Taco this wouldn't have happened

:shrug:

[gorfle]

36. A chance is better than no chance.

Who can say? Carrying a firearm is no guarantee of being able to defend yourself against a deadly threat. But being defenseless almost always guarantees that you won't be able to.

[SteveM]

41. Actually, the only people with guns in restaurant mass-murders were murderers.

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. So what's the beef this time?

I'm sure the shooter had a worthwhile reason. :sarcasm:

It's so damn sickening......

[spin]

39. The shooter was a criminal with an extensive record ...

criminals don't respect or obey laws or other people.

This situation wouldn't have happened if he was locked up in a jail.

[LeftyMom]

4. Well, somebody finally found a way to make lunch at Del Taco worse.

:shrug:

[johnnie]

6. Ouch n/t

[JI7]

7. why didn't he just shoot himself ? did he know the people he shot ?

[Hoopla Phil]

9. The names and relationships have not been released but it seems

that this was not a random event. Looks like it was personal.

http://www.startribune.com/nation/96733229.html

[proteus_lives]

15. Probably a disgruntled family member of some sort.

[benEzra]

21. Stepfather of the critically injured woman and step-grandfather of the children. (n/t)

[oneshooter]

35. He shot himself because he is a coward

Unwilling to face up to the crime he had committed. He should die a cowards death. Hanging at the end of a rope, in full view of the public.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[benEzra]

18. The murderer had an "extensive and violent" criminal record

and was presumably thereby barred by Federal and state law from so much as touching a gun or ammunition.

Police said several other people were in the restaurant, but the gunman clearly walked in seeking the four victims. They said the gunman had a long and violent criminal record, but did not give further details.

What kind of fucking bastard shoots kids, his own stepdaughter, and her husband to "get even" with somebody? What an indescribable loser.

Lest any vultures pull out the "this proves we need more restrictions" card, California has the strictest gun control laws in the nation and reserves carry licenses for the wealthy and politically connected, so no one in this tragedy had a carry license. And assuming this was a middle-class family, the parents probably couldn't have gotten a license to carry even if they knew this shitbucket wanted to kill them.

[proteus_lives]

24. It's all about the easy answers for them.

Bans, prohibitions, restrictions.

It's easy then dealing with the problem.

[shadowrider]

27. There ought to be a law that prohibits people with "extensive criminal records" from having guns

Oh, wait. Nevermind, my bad.

[east texas lib]

28. This is a flat out failure of the criminal justice system more than anything else...

This prick was given multiple chances yet chose the way of violence time and time again. This one is on the judges that evidently put feeling sorry for the shooter well above the hard to grasp concept of keeping violent, proven to be dangerous people locked up.

[slackmaster]

30. Shooter had an extensive criminal record dating back to the 1970s

...Schlager, who is from Lancaster in northern Los Angeles County, had an extensive criminal record dating back to 1972 that included assault with a deadly weapon and a restraining order taken out by a co-worker....

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jun/19/man-shoots-4-self-in-calif-fast-food-restaurant/

I must ask - Why was this man not in prison?

And with his criminal past, he can't legally obtain or possess a firearm. Whoever provided him with one committed a crime. I hope the gun can be traced back to someone who can be prosecuted for that. Unless it was stolen, it should be possible to determine the point at which it entered the black market.

[Katya Mullethov]

32. According to what I read in the paper

They need the money for LOTS and LOTS and LOTS and LOTS and LOTS and LOTS of other things .

But then , as Sam Clemens would say " you are misinformed" .

[one-eyed fat man]

37. Why is it??

Seems like every time some judge decides that prison conditions are too mean, crowded or there's not enough selections on the cable TV and orders California to release prisoners to relieve crowding or save money they turn loose the mother stabbers, father rapers, child molesters and stone cold killers while the brain fried doper, or the guy who kited a few checks, but who never hurt anyone get to serve out every day of their sentence?

Non-violent offenders can better be rehabilitated, if they can be helped, in environments other than prisons. There are violent recidivist criminals that need locking up. They have no interest in becoming members of society. They have spent decades proving themselves uninterested in redemption and they only need to be warehoused to keep them away from the rest of us.

It makes sense, in a perverse way, that prison officials would rather keep the harmless and inoffensive criminals to make their work environment less hostile, but turning loose hateful and murderous bastards is just plain ignorant!

[Katya Mullethov]

40. Too organic to be accidental

And yet , so bizarre as to give one pause before making the accusation .


Catch and release ....ITS THEIR RICE BOWL !

[Katya Mullethov]

31. If only

California had passed laws to make sure:
the shooter killed the innocent victims with a caliber that wasn't "large" and "high-powered"
the shooter killed the innocent victims with a caliber that wasn't a small "Saturday Night Special" caliber
the shooter killed the innocent victims with a non-semi-automatic weapon
the shooter killed the innocent victims without using a high-capacity magazine
the shooter killed the innocent victims with non-toxic environmentally friendly ammunition
the shooter killed the innocent victims with serialized bullets
the shooter killed the innocent victims after passing the Kalif. DOJ and FBI NICS checks
and
the shooter killed the innocent victims with a gun that didn't have a shoulder thing that goes up?