masterrig 1 #126 September 17, 2013 GravitymasterIt's also being reported he was hearing voices. It was reported also that 'supposedly' he contacted 2 professional sources who he said would not help him. This made him upset and he went over the edge and proceeded to open fire. To me, it's amazing that the guy, with all that has been said about his background, was able to get 'top security'. How was the guy allowed to get this far? Someone somewhere wasn't paying attention. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #127 September 17, 2013 devildog ************I still feel that if guns are taken away from law abiding citizens... Chuck Apparently Mr. Alexis had never been convicted of anything, so he WAS a law abiding citizen, right up until the instant of his death. Ask Turtlespeed. However, he WAS Texan. http://spdblotter.seattle.gov/2013/09/16/suspect-in-navy-yard-attack-previously-arrested-in-seattle-for-anger-fueled-shooting/ Law abiding, except for the whole shooting out the tires of cars in 2004 He wasn't tried and or convicted of a crime. I believe, from what I've been told, a person is innocent till proven guilty. Seems as though, over the years, that has taken a 180. Chuck I didn't say he was convicted or a criminal. There are plenty of ways you can not abide by the law and still not not be tried or sentenced. But I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that in Seattle, its not abiding by the law if you shoot out car tires in a parking lot. I see your point... and it's a good one! You brought-out another good point... why didn't Seattle charge him with something like 'discharging a firearm in city limits' or disorderly conduct or vandalism... they really missed the boat, there. Not un-like others along the way who let him slip through the cracks. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #128 September 17, 2013 masterrig***It's also being reported he was hearing voices. It was reported also that 'supposedly' he contacted 2 professional sources who he said would not help him. This made him upset and he went over the edge and proceeded to open fire. To me, it's amazing that the guy, with all that has been said about his background, was able to get 'top security'. How was the guy allowed to get this far? Someone somewhere wasn't paying attention. Chuck I remember the old days when employers would never hire someone with less than an honorable discharge. I guess that doesn't float today.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #129 September 17, 2013 rickjump1******It's also being reported he was hearing voices. It was reported also that 'supposedly' he contacted 2 professional sources who he said would not help him. This made him upset and he went over the edge and proceeded to open fire. To me, it's amazing that the guy, with all that has been said about his background, was able to get 'top security'. How was the guy allowed to get this far? Someone somewhere wasn't paying attention. Chuck I remember the old days when employers would never hire someone with less than an honorable discharge. I guess that doesn't float today. I think, that's because of all the anti-discrimination laws that have been passed. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #130 September 17, 2013 QuoteI think, that's because of all the anti-discrimination laws that have been passed. I disagree. There are no laws against discriminating against people based on their past bad behavior. This whole case is weird. I hold a Secret clearance, and one of the questions on the SF-86 is "Have you ever received a discharge that was other than honorable?" The shooter would have had to answer yes to that question. I'm suprised he was still able to receive a Secret clearance. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 21 #131 September 17, 2013 DanGQuoteI think, that's because of all the anti-discrimination laws that have been passed. I disagree. There are no laws against discriminating against people based on their past bad behavior. This whole case is weird. I hold a Secret clearance, and one of the questions on the SF-86 is "Have you ever received a discharge that was other than honorable?" The shooter would have had to answer yes to that question. I'm suprised he was still able to receive a Secret clearance. Maybe I missed something but, the report I heard this AM said he was honorably discharged! Has that account changed?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 21 #132 September 17, 2013 quade***There I went for it Sadly, your "facts" don't hold up to history. http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/20/us/worst-u-s-shootings-timeline/index.html The fact is, mass gun violence has been accelerating. recently yes since the 1960's not so much"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #133 September 17, 2013 DanGQuoteI think, that's because of all the anti-discrimination laws that have been passed. I disagree. There are no laws against discriminating against people based on their past bad behavior. This whole case is weird. I hold a Secret clearance, and one of the questions on the SF-86 is "Have you ever received a discharge that was other than honorable?" The shooter would have had to answer yes to that question. I'm suprised he was still able to receive a Secret clearance. True. Questions in regard to 'criminal' history are allowed. Thanks for pointing that out. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 21 #134 September 17, 2013 New report AR15 NOT used http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/17/us/ar-15-gun-debate/?hpt=hp_t1"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #135 September 17, 2013 quade***I don't believe anything CNN says. Their record on truth and honesty is laughable at best. So, you believe CNN is "faking" the dates and histories of these shootings? Gee if only there was some sort of magic box you could use to check. It's not the events they put down. It's the events they did not. Immediately I noticed that the 101 California shooting was missing - this was the precursor to the 1994 AWB. Its absence is odd. Nor was the Stockton school shooting by Purdy, which lead to the AK47 ban in California. Since the "story" doesn't indicate their selection process, it's hard to tell. I may be that they set the standard at 10+ dead, which eliminates both of the above, but seems misguided. Quite a few kids were hurt in Stockton (nearly 30) in addition to the 5 killed. Having that bar creates an artificial filter on an event that is already an outlier, since even at the standard of 4 killed you only have 20some events per year. Trying to make a statistical conclusion, given that, is a fool's errand. I have no doubt that this was their intent. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #136 September 17, 2013 QuoteMaybe I missed something but, the report I heard this AM said he was honorably discharged! I heard this morning that his discharge was "General". That's not the same as Honorable. The options for discharge are: Honorable Dishonorable Other Than Honorable General Bad Conduct I think there are some other, less common ones, but those are the usual ones. A General dischange indicates that he didn't finish out his committment, but his problems didn't rise to the level of Dishonorable or Bad Conduct. It's complicated, and I'm far from an expert. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 21 #137 September 17, 2013 DanGQuoteMaybe I missed something but, the report I heard this AM said he was honorably discharged! I heard this morning that his discharge was "General". That's not the same as Honorable. The options for discharge are: Honorable Dishonorable Other Than Honorable General Bad Conduct I think there are some other, less common ones, but those are the usual ones. A General dischange indicates that he didn't finish out his committment, but his problems didn't rise to the level of Dishonorable or Bad Conduct. It's complicated, and I'm far from an expert. AP reporting he got an honorable discharge http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NAVY_YARD_SHOOTING_DISCHARGE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-09-17-10-51-51"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #138 September 17, 2013 Just saw tis... http://home.myhughesnet.com/news/read/category/Top%20News/article/ap-navy_yard_gunman_visited_range_day_befor-ap Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 737 #139 September 17, 2013 Interesting point that I've noticed as well. Arrested? Charged?? MUST be guilty - and we'll keep bringing it up for the rest of your life. Convicted of a misdemeanor or a non-violent felony? You're fucked for life. It used to be innocent until proven guilty and if you've paid your debt to society you get another chance. We wonder why so many re-offend? Give them a path and a chance to succeed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,882 #140 September 17, 2013 Gravitymaster ******Why are you limiting it to 2 years. Oh, never mind. Just more obfuscation on your part. OK, 5 years, 10 years... Which western nation has had more mass shootings in that time? Oh, now it's a Western Nation. Now? Post #89, this thread: "Tell us which other western nations have had as many mass shootings as the USA in the past 2 years." Reading is a useful skill - you should try it sometime.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,882 #141 September 17, 2013 devildog ******I still feel that if guns are taken away from law abiding citizens... Chuck Apparently Mr. Alexis had never been convicted of anything, so he WAS a law abiding citizen, right up until the instant of his death. Ask Turtlespeed. However, he WAS Texan. http://spdblotter.seattle.gov/2013/09/16/suspect-in-navy-yard-attack-previously-arrested-in-seattle-for-anger-fueled-shooting/ Law abiding, except for the whole shooting out the tires of cars in 2004 But Turtlespeed told us very clearly that he is innocent until proven guilty in court. And that never happened. Therefore, law abiding.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 737 #142 September 17, 2013 Not convicted of crimes = law abiding citizen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,882 #143 September 17, 2013 rickjump1******It's also being reported he was hearing voices. It was reported also that 'supposedly' he contacted 2 professional sources who he said would not help him. This made him upset and he went over the edge and proceeded to open fire. To me, it's amazing that the guy, with all that has been said about his background, was able to get 'top security'. How was the guy allowed to get this far? Someone somewhere wasn't paying attention. Chuck I remember the old days when employers would never hire someone with less than an honorable discharge. I guess that doesn't float today. Where did it say he had a "less than honorable" discharge?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,882 #144 September 17, 2013 rushmcNew report AR15 NOT used http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/17/us/ar-15-gun-debate/?hpt=hp_t1 Well, that's good news for the dead people.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 737 #145 September 17, 2013 Companies have hired BCD's and OTH's, and General, and LTH's as well as convicted felons forever. This guy had an honorable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #146 September 17, 2013 The way I see it, folks are tried and convicted in the media. People tend to believe the worst. Recent big trials in Florida, for example. The media got hold of them and look what happened. Jody Arias trial in Arizona was a huge media 'event'. I really believe, the media should not be allowed in any courtroom. I believe, some can be helped and there are that few who you cannot help, no matter what. It's difficult to sort them out but Ya' gotta try something. Our prisons are about to bust at the seams. That's another argument. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,882 #147 September 17, 2013 normissCompanies have hired BCD's and OTH's, and General, and LTH's as well as convicted felons forever. This guy had an honorable. Correct.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #148 September 17, 2013 normissNot convicted of crimes = law abiding citizen. No. Not by a LONG shot.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,343 #149 September 17, 2013 But from a legal point of view, yes. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #150 September 17, 2013 DanGQuoteMaybe I missed something but, the report I heard this AM said he was honorably discharged! I heard this morning that his discharge was "General". That's not the same as Honorable. The options for discharge are: Honorable Dishonorable Other Than Honorable General Bad Conduct I think there are some other, less common ones, but those are the usual ones. A General dischange indicates that he didn't finish out his committment, but his problems didn't rise to the level of Dishonorable or Bad Conduct. It's complicated, and I'm far from an expert. Just heard.. the shooter's original discharge was a 'General' discharge, later up-graded to an 'honorable' discharge because he was (at the time) applying to a civilian security company. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites