DC shooting. Weapons used

sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior MemberPosts: 1,569 Senior Member
The Antis will not concede that a " military grade AR-15 assault weapon was not involved ." It has to be an evil "assault weapon" committing murder on it's own ! I cannot find any information in the media That discloses what weapons were used except a shotgun and a handgun which was acquired from a security guard who was slain by the shotgun. Another report that he killed a Military Policeman (MP) and acquired their M4 (selective fire) carbine! The antis have to have an evil "assault rifle" involved! That is what they need in order for them to be banned as they would be effective to insure a resistance to government oppression of our citizens Constitutional rights! I have sworn to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all Enemies Foreign and Domestic. Now-days it is very heavy on DOMESTIC!!!

Replies

  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,985 Senior Member
    No AR-15, but a shotgun he may have assembled in the bathroom and a couple handguns from guards he shot?

    No Cigar fer gun grabbers on the AR-15, but the morons think.......................

    http://reason.com/blog/2013/09/17/even-if-the-navy-yard-shooter-did-not-us

    "Even If the Navy Yard Shooter Did Not Use an AR-15, His Crime Shows Why AR-15s Should Be Banned"
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • bisleybisley Senior Member Posts: 10,553 Senior Member
    Frankenfeinstein, et al, will not be deterred by this negligible detail. They will just make their points to reporters who won't ask any questions, and they will be repeated by all the others with the same agenda.
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 5,545 Senior Member
    This mornings news said it was a Remington 870. A couple of days ago one of the news channels showed an "artists conception" of the shooter and it showed a black guy in an elevated position leaning over a railing firing an AR15 rifle. Talk about fabricating the news.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,061 Senior Member
    You can't trust commie/democrats/media-holes to tell the truth about anything.
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • JerryBobCoJerryBobCo Senior Member Posts: 6,484 Senior Member
    I'm confused about this as well. Last night, Bill O'Reilly made the point that the press, including Fox News, had misreported that an AR-15 had been used. Unfortunately, he didn't say what firearm(s) had been used, or if there was more than one.

    It's hard for me to imagine someone using a pump shotgun (Remington 870) to take out 12 people, but if no one else is armed, and there are a lot of potential victims in a confined space, I can see how it can happen.
    Jerry

    Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,052 Senior Member
    What I've read so far is what Big Chief said: he started with an 870, then used that to get 1 handgun which he got another handgun with.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 25,809 Senior Member
    If there had been a quick response team at the yard similar to the shipboard "Security Alert" system when I was serving, that tart would have been shot to doll rags in short order. Nothing like arming a bunch of small arms trained sailors and sending them out on a search and destroy mission. Throw in a bunch of armed Marines and there wouldn't have been enough left to bury.

    It's way past time to start doing armed intruder training on all military installations and having response teams on standby to take care of them. What we've got now ain't working.
    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.


  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,803 Senior Member
    To me, it makes no difference if one firearm is the preferred choice of mass shooters. I don't care. Take that particular firearm away and the perps will just use whatever they consider the next best option, unless of course they can find what they want on the black market. I don't care what they prefer. Banning it isn't going to stop this from happening. And as we sadly saw, they can kill just as many people with OTHER weapons than they can with an AR type weapon. The problem ise, if it's a gun free zone and nobody is packing except the guards or rather security, then by the time security arrives there can be many people dead. However, if individuals are armed somebody can take the perp out before he gets that far. But Libtards don't see it that way. I think it's there agenda to disarm us, not so much their concern for public safety. But personally, I won't give an inch to there agenda. Like Patrick Henry said in his Liberty or Death speech, " Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" If I get shot by a mass shooter, at least if it's done my way I'll have a fighting chance. There is nowhere on this planet that firearms should be denied to law abiding citizens.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,052 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    If there had been a quick response team at the yard similar to the shipboard "Security Alert" system when I was serving, that tart would have been shot to doll rags in short order. Nothing like arming a bunch of small arms trained sailors and sending them out on a search and destroy mission. Throw in a bunch of armed Marines and there wouldn't have been enough left to bury.

    It's way past time to start doing armed intruder training on all military installations and having response teams on standby to take care of them. What we've got now ain't working.
    From what I've read, the Navy Yard was understaffed as far as their normal police force goes, and a tactical team that was en route was told to stand down.

    http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/18/us/navy-yard-shooting-recap/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
    Overkill is underrated.
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,803 Senior Member
    JerryBobCo wrote: »
    I'm confused about this as well. Last night, Bill O'Reilly made the point that the press, including Fox News, had misreported that an AR-15 had been used. Unfortunately, he didn't say what firearm(s) had been used, or if there was more than one.

    It's hard for me to imagine someone using a pump shotgun (Remington 870) to take out 12 people, but if no one else is armed, and there are a lot of potential victims in a confined space, I can see how it can happen.

    Oh I can definitely see the virtues of a pump shotgun for a preferred weapon to use in a mass shooting. You can put an extended magazine tube on it and have 7 shots. Kill 7 and reload. And like you pointed out, if nobody in the immediate area is armed, and there are a lot of unarmed targets, he can have a field day. But like I said, I don't care what the preferred weapon is, I will never be for banning any gun. It's our right and it's there for a purpose. I think this is what Obama AND Clinton and all these commies have in mind, disarming the people. They have learned well from their predecessors, Hitler, Stalin, and all the rest.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,624 Senior Member
    I cannot understand why all military officers and senior NCOs aren't required to be armed at all times. Open carry on bases, concealed carry off. Why do we call the services "armed forces" anyway?
  • shootbrownelkshootbrownelk Senior Member Posts: 2,019 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    I cannot understand why all military officers and senior NCOs aren't required to be armed at all times. Open carry on bases, concealed carry off. Why do we call the services "armed forces" anyway?

    Right Horselips, disarming the military personel is courtesy of George H.W. Bush. Some republican he was.
  • Make_My_DayMake_My_Day Senior Member Posts: 7,061 Senior Member
    Right Horselips, disarming the military personel is courtesy of George H.W. Bush. Some republican he was.
    I've been reading that Clinton did it.
    JOE MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT:
    THE DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW COMMUNISTS!
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Posts: 4,584 Senior Member
    I've been reading that Clinton did it.

    Yep, Clinton did it, but Dubya did nothing to overturn it.
    The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.

    Ayn Rand
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 14,837 Senior Member
    Right Horselips, disarming the military personel is courtesy of George H.W. Bush. Some republican he was.

    Interesting....How is troops being disarmed on stateside military bases anything new? Since 1969 I've been on a LOT of military bases in the U.S. and with the exception of law enforcement and security types, I have NEVER seen small arms and ammo made available to the troops on a regular basis - weapons were secured in arms rooms. Can't recall any military bases were troops were running around armed on a daily basis unless their MOS called for it. There was a time where the CQ and the OD had ACCESS to a firearm, but when I was in, those were most often kept in a safe in the orderly room....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • SlanteyedshootistSlanteyedshootist Senior Member Posts: 3,947 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    To me, it makes no difference if one firearm is the preferred choice of mass shooters. I don't care. Take that particular firearm away and the perps will just use whatever they consider the next best option, unless of course they can find what they want on the black market. I don't care what they prefer. Banning it isn't going to stop this from happening. And as we sadly saw, they can kill just as many people with OTHER weapons than they can with an AR type weapon. The problem ise, if it's a gun free zone and nobody is packing except the guards or rather security, then by the time security arrives there can be many people dead. However, if individuals are armed somebody can take the perp out before he gets that far. But Libtards don't see it that way. I think it's there agenda to disarm us, not so much their concern for public safety. But personally, I won't give an inch to there agenda. Like Patrick Henry said in his Liberty or Death speech, " Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" If I get shot by a mass shooter, at least if it's done my way I'll have a fighting chance. There is nowhere on this planet that firearms should be denied to law abiding citizens.

    You NAILED it bruddah!
    The answer to 1984 is 1776
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,052 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Interesting....How is troops being disarmed on stateside military bases anything new? Since 1969 I've been on a LOT of military bases in the U.S. and with the exception of law enforcement and security types, I have NEVER seen small arms and ammo made available to the troops on a regular basis - weapons were secured in arms rooms. Can't recall any military bases were troops were running around armed on a daily basis unless their MOS called for it. There was a time where the CQ and the OD had ACCESS to a firearm, but when I was in, those were most often kept in a safe in the orderly room....
    Stop messing with people's internal political dialogues.
    Overkill is underrated.
  • LerchessLerchess Senior Member Posts: 550 Senior Member
    I've been reading that Clinton did it.

    Incorrect. EVERYTHING is Bush's fault. I had a headache yesterday. Yup - Bush's fault. Its nice not being responsible for anything since he takes the rap for it all.
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 14,837 Senior Member
    Stop messing with people's internal political dialogues.

    I'll go stand in the corner....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,985 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Interesting....How is troops being disarmed on stateside military bases anything new? Since 1969 I've been on a LOT of military bases in the U.S. and with the exception of law enforcement and security types, I have NEVER seen small arms and ammo made available to the troops on a regular basis - weapons were secured in arms rooms. Can't recall any military bases were troops were running around armed on a daily basis unless their MOS called for it. There was a time where the CQ and the OD had ACCESS to a firearm, but when I was in, those were most often kept in a safe in the orderly room....


    I remember pulling assistant CQ ( Called CQ Runner) he wore a .45 and I had a pick/mattock handle (club), especially in Germany where GIs would would get very drunk and disorderly come back to the barracks and wanna kick up a lot of sand and try and tear the place down.

    We were supposed to read only the CQ instructions/ alert rosters/SOPs for different situations, but the desk drawer in the hallway or on loan from a nearby room provided us with plenty of interesting reading (mostly viewing) materials :tooth:
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • shootbrownelkshootbrownelk Senior Member Posts: 2,019 Senior Member
    Lerchess wrote: »
    Incorrect. EVERYTHING is Bush's fault. I had a headache yesterday. Yup - Bush's fault. Its nice not being responsible for anything since he takes the rap for it all.

    George H.W. Bush....Clinton just rode along after the fact.
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 14,837 Senior Member
    George H.W. Bush....Clinton just rode along after the fact.

    Please provide the E.O. or whatever Bush supposedly signed that disarmed the troops at US bases any more than they had been disarmed in the previous 30 years...I'm interested in reading it....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,052 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Please provide the E.O. or whatever Bush supposedly signed that disarmed the troops at US bases any more than they had been disarmed in the previous 30 years...I'm interested in reading it....
    Who let you out of your corner?
    Overkill is underrated.
  • jbp-ohiojbp-ohio Senior Member Posts: 9,466 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Please provide the E.O. or whatever Bush supposedly signed that disarmed the troops at US bases any more than they had been disarmed in the previous 30 years...I'm interested in reading it....

    I couldn't freely have privately owned weapon in 1986-90
    "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Posts: 13,052 Senior Member
    jbp-ohio wrote: »
    I couldn't freely have privately owned weapon in 1986-90
    You stand in another corner...
    Overkill is underrated.
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,624 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Interesting....How is troops being disarmed on stateside military bases anything new? Since 1969 I've been on a LOT of military bases in the U.S. and with the exception of law enforcement and security types, I have NEVER seen small arms and ammo made available to the troops on a regular basis - weapons were secured in arms rooms. Can't recall any military bases were troops were running around armed on a daily basis unless their MOS called for it. There was a time where the CQ and the OD had ACCESS to a firearm, but when I was in, those were most often kept in a safe in the orderly room....

    In 1969 we weren't involved in an asymmetrical war against AlQaeda (Obama's new ally in Syria) where there are no front lines, and enemy attacks can come anywhere, anytime. Arming all officers and senior NCOs with sidearms would afford some additional measure of security in areas beyond the usual checkpoints, where combat is usually unforeseen.
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 14,837 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    Arming all officers and senior NCOs with sidearms would afford some additional measure of security in areas beyond the usual checkpoints, where combat is usually unforeseen.

    Are you including 2 Lts? You know the most dangerous thing in the world is a 2 Lt with a compass.
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • KSU FirefighterKSU Firefighter Senior Member Posts: 3,245 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Are you including 2 Lts? You know the most dangerous thing in the world is a 2 Lt with a compass.

    Give the Butterbars a compass, let the NCO's have the sidearms.
    The fire service needs a "culture of extinguishment not safety" Ray McCormack FDNY
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 6,652 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Please provide the E.O. or whatever Bush supposedly signed that disarmed the troops at US bases any more than they had been disarmed in the previous 30 years...I'm interested in reading it....[/QUOTE]

    So would I.
    Just look at the flowers Lizzie, just look at the flowers.
  • sgtrock21sgtrock21 Senior Member Posts: 1,569 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Please provide the E.O. or whatever Bush supposedly signed that disarmed the troops at US bases any more than they had been disarmed in the previous 30 years...I'm interested in reading it....
    It worked great for the Army at Pearl Harbor. Weapons and ammunition locked up. Aircraft with no ammunition. With the exception of my 7 month deployment to the former Yugoslavia I spent 32 years in the Army National Guard with vaults full of weapons with no ammunition! Our ammunition was at the Ammunition Supply Point (ASP) at Ft. Lewis Washington. About 150 miles away! Much worse than Pearl Harbor! When I flew as a crewmember in OV-1 Mohawks I carried a H&R 999 nine shot .22 revolver with a 50 round box of ammunition. I had cleared it with my commanding officer. He thought it was a good idea as we flew over hundreds of square miles of wilderness. If we had to use our ejection seats we would possibly not have time to radio our location. We gave position reports every 100 miles or so. We could have ended up missing for a few days. Potting a bunny or defending against coyotes may have had some importance. I had a pilot ask if my revolver was loaded I replied no. It is for survival, the ammunition is in another pocket of my survival vest. He thought that was a good idea. It didn't take long before many aircrews if they choose to were carrying .22 revolvers or autos. That was when our military could still use common sense (1970s).
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.