Running Out Of Ammo Stopped The Carnage. Not A Good Guy With A Gun.

[TheMastersNemesis]

If you really listen to the police reports it looks like the shooter was able to expend ALL his ammunition and ran out. He supposedly fired 450 rounds which may have benn as much as he was able to carry. Plus he reloaded a number of time with 30 round clips. What is he had the 100 round canisters instead of 30.

These kinds of massacres were simply NOT possible in the absence of assault weapons. In the past most guns had no more that 10 rounds. And hunting guns had no more than 5. Of course there were exceptions. Most guns sold now seem to be assault rifles.

[malaise]

1. That simple

Off to the greatest page


Ban the assault weapons and these magazines

[HopeAgain]

29. Yes, that needs to be our mantra

[MurderMittenLiberal]

103. lol

You really like suggesting things for the greatest page

[ClarendonDem]

2. This article seems to suggest

The neighbor stopped the shooting, not lack of ammo. And he had at least 1 round left since he shot himself.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/11/07/inside-the-texas-church-she-thought-it-was-her-turn-to-die-then-outside-a-man-appeared/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_mm-texassurvivor-622am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.617177cd9bb6

[Yupster]

3. That was my first thought

He wasn't completely out of ammo if he shot himself later.

[lagomorph777]

9. Saved one.

[Stallion]

4. He Had More Guns in His Car

...he ran out of ammo in the Church

[TheMastersNemesis]

6. 450 rounds is a lot of ammo to carry. Neighbor Probably Did Not Stop This Guy.

He was 450 rounds late. I guess that fact that they were not all killed is acceptable.

[dumbcat]

17. Late? He beat the police

Just sayin'.

[FreeState]

46. Both missed the main event

and neither stopped it from happening.

Who cares who got there first afterwards.

[Baconator]

127. The person who could have been #29 but wasn't...

... because dumbass was intercepted at some level.

[maxsolomon]

69. he gets a set of steak knives

not a Cadillac.

just sayin'.

[riversedge]

33. But the shooter dropped his rifle--then fled to his car. ....

says he had three gun shot wounds--one to his head (self inflicted).


...........“He saw me and I saw him,” Willeford told the station.

It was Willeford’s presence that distracted Kelley.

Willeford hit Kelley at least once, authorities said. Kelley then dropped his rifle, jumped in his Ford Expedition SUV and fled. Willeford, with the help of Johnnie Langendorff who had stopped in his truck when he saw what was happening, gave chase at high speed, until Kelley’s car careened off the road into a ditch. Kelley was dead, with three gunshot wounds, including a self-inflicted shot to the head, authorities said Monday. Willeford apparently hit him in the leg and torso, according to Freeman Martin of the Texas Department of Public Safety.

[louis-t]

80. Call me when a 'good guy with gun' actually stops a mass murder

instead of winging a guy after he's already killed or wounded everyone in the church.

[sarisataka]

89. Catch -22

[LeftInTX]

114. I know...

The NRA and Republicans are touting this "Good guy with a gun".

Meanwhile, mass shootings will be promoted as events with a "good guy"

[Bucky]

133. A little empathy helps here. There'd be no reason for that neighbor to assume

that the rampage killer didn't have more weapons in the car or didn't intend to drive on to a new site to continue the killing. Given the history of these things, it's probably the safest assumption that as long as this mass murderer was moving around, the community was in danger.

[LiberalFighter]

146. Yep! Didn't stop the murders in the church.

[linuxman]

149. LOL

Stops the shooter before he kills? HAHA, NOT EVEN A SHOOTER! YOU STOPPED NOTHING CAUSE IT DIDN"T HAPPEN!

Stop shooter after he kills! NOPE! HE ALREADY KILLED SOMEONE, DOESN't COUNT!

Never change.

[Blue_true]

59. Police said that his car was loaded with other guns and ammo.

Since he got back to his car, he had plenty of ammo if he wanted to keep killing. My uneducated guess, he had done what he came to do and gave up.

[sammythecat]

95. I see 2 possibilities

The one you just laid out, and the fact that he was being persued by someone who had just shot him twice might also have changed his plan.

[Blue_true]

100. Yeah, I see your point.

I won't argue that the neighbor did not save some lives, he likely saved the in laws and maybe former wife when the gunman did not find them in the church. But to argue that the neighbor saved lives in the church is wrong, IMO, based upon news accountings of what happened.

[sammythecat]

107. If they're saying he saved lives in the church

then yes, they're wrong. I can't know, of course, but I doubt he intended to return to the church.

[ClarendonDem]

117. The WaPo

Has a story today stating that the neighbor in fact saved lives in the church. The gunman was shooting the injured when the neighbor showed up and distracted him.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/11/07/inside-the-texas-church-she-thought-it-was-her-turn-to-die-then-outside-a-man-appeared/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_mm-texassurvivor-622am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.255883ce3026

[exboyfil]

61. I think that he killed

Himself with a handgun. He dropped his primary weapon.

[George II]

68. Apparently he had guns in his truck that he didn't carry into the church.

[Hangingon]

115. Other weapons and ammo in his truck. N/r

[eppur_se_muova]

124. Shot himself with a handgun. nt

[sarisataka]

5. I think you are

Assuming facts not in evidence as they say on TV.

[TheMastersNemesis]

8. Even Though The Neighbor Responded Was Helpful, It Did Not Really Stop It.

The fact that the shooter was able to be so well armed in the 1st place is the problem. Had the neighbor been able to respond earlier and shoot with surprise would have probably lost in the exchange of fire if 1st volley misses.

I just believe his role has been inflated. His pursuit at least ended the shooters escape plans and saved the police the trouble.

[LakeVermilion]

13. Neighbor is lucky that he's not dead or in a hospital...

[deurbano]

28. Or that a bystander is not dead or in the hospital.

[jmg257]

64. Yep - good thing he brought enough gun to the gunfight. nt

[sarisataka]

30. I was referring to the claim

That he was out of ammo. No report has stated that but there is proof he had at least one bullet. Maybe it was his last, or maybe he had another 500.

It will always be open to debate how important the neighbors' intervention was since we don't know what, if any, plans the murderer had.

We do know, as you indicate, the intervention prevented a clean getaway and ultimately led to the murderer's demise.

[Blue_true]

65. He died in a car that was loaded with guns and ammo.

My guess is he was done in the church. The neighbor may have saved some lives, mainly the in laws and former wife if the guy had been able to find them.

[LanternWaste]

31. Postulating informal theory is not assumption, whether they say that on TV or not.

Postulating informal theory is not assumption, whether they say that on TV or not.

[sarisataka]

36. Making a positive statement

(shooter was out of ammo) that is contradicted by evidence (shooter was able to shoot himself) is making an incorrect assumption.

I have not seen any articles that report how much ammo the shooter had for the weapon he dropped, not the other guns in his vehicle.

[ffr]

7. Fact of the matter, the guy with the shotgun would have been outmatched by an AR15

Nobody is safe from these massacres. I know. I have someone I know one who has survived one of these mass killings. That's how common they are becoming.

[dumbcat]

19. What guy with the shotgun?

[ffr]

125. Early reports I heard were that the gunman was persued by someone with a shotgun

I don't find any reference to it now, just that shots were exchanged.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/05/us/texas-church-shooting-resident-action/index.html

[7962]

140. He had a rifle, not a shotgun. His rounds were probably MORE powerful, if it was a deer rifle.

[jmg257]

22. There ya go - THAT is why people buy ARs.

As apparently the neighbor had.

"Kelley, who was 26 and lived in nearby New Braunfels, had been wounded earlier when he got into a gunfight outside the church with a man who lived nearby and was armed with at AR-15 assault-type rifle",

[Not Ruth]

10. copyright deletion

Last edited Tue Nov 7, 2017, 01:29 PM - Edit history (1)

[TheMastersNemesis]

11. I Could Never Live In A Deranged Community Like That.

[Alea]

47. That community is not deranged

You can live where ever you want but that community is not deranged.

[maxsolomon]

71. You already do.

you live in America.

[TheMastersNemesis]

77. Touche. That Community Is A Community Of Idiots.

[cwydro]

139. Wow, judge much?

Ever been there?

The church seems to be an integrated congregation of whites, Hispanics, AAs, etc.

A very close-knit community, where people take care of each other. But somehow you know and have decided that they are a “community of idiots.”

I remember your posts after Las Vegas, where you insinuated that the crowd was probably pro-Trump. You were properly put in your place in that thread by many here who recognized your victim-blaming.

Your victim blaming is ugly, and it makes DU look bad. Please stop it.

[forgotmylogin]

12. Pistol in the glove compartment?

If he's got AR-15s, he's got spare guns laying around.

I sincerely doubt he saved one last round and shot himself in a car with a rifle. Logistically awkward.

[Not Ruth]

15. That would be speculative and illegal (I know....) as his concealed carry permit was denied by TX

And TX considers glove compartment to be concealed carry if you are within reach of it.

56. Can I carry a handgun in my personal vehicle without a permit?

Yes. Section 46.02, Texas Penal Code was amended to allow a person to carry a handgun in a motor vehicle that is owned by the person or under his/her control. The weapon must not be in plain view, and the person must not be engaged in criminal activity other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic. Finally, a person carrying a handgun in his/her car must not be prohibited by law from possessing a firearm and the person cannot be a member of a criminal street gang as defined in Section 71.01.


58. If the handgun is on the seat beside me, am I still considered to be "carrying"?

Yes. The statute refers to carrying a gun "on or about" your person. Texas courts generally have considered this to include any gun within your reach, including one stored in your glove compartment.

[forgotmylogin]

20. I know I'm speculating...

But if someone makes the decision to kill 50 people in a church, they are capable of planning for the possibility of not being taken alive by the police. Since we have lots of gun massacres to compare to, that's usually the end they plan for.

[dumbcat]

21. I think you need to read that again

SMH.

[True Blue American]

52. He had 4 guns

In the SUV.

[struggle4progress]

14. "Look for the weird. Look for twitches. Look for nervousness."

After looking around for weird, nervous, twitchy folk, consider also checking for anyone dressed in body armor, wearing a skull mask, carrying an assault rifle, and shouting 'Everybody die, motherf--ker!'

[Orrex]

23. Did the good guy shoot him during the spree or while he was fleeing?

[Not Ruth]

24. Probably will find out in a few weeks after an autopsy

[Orrex]

35. Until then, we should reject claims that he stopped the shooter

Currently such claims are at best unsupported, but he'll no doubt be scooped up and added to the list of "good guys who stopped mass shootings" regardless of subsequent reality.

At present, from the article, we know only that the good guy was not at the scene, that he retrieved his firearm and voluntarily entered the scene, apparently after the shooting was already over. Additionally, he pursued the shooter on his own initiative.

Regardless of the outcome, that sounds more or less unmistakably like vigilante justice.

[B2G]

39. See the link to the autopsy below.

He was shot 3 times. Once in the leg, once in the torso and the self inflicted shot to the head.

I think it's safe to assume the guy at the church hit him twice.

ETA: This is in no way 'vigilante justice'. He was trying to stop an active shooting. World's apart.

[Orrex]

43. He pursued the shooter away from the scene, no?

What was his intent in doing so?

[B2G]

45. To stop him.

Once he wrecked his car, the 2 in pursuit trained their guns on him, told him to get out of the car but did not fire any shots.

If their intent was to kill him, he wouldn't have had a chance to kill himself.

[Orrex]

57. So they left voluntarily the crime scene?

Thanks for confirming. That's vigilante justice.

[B2G]

62. No, vigilante justice would have been

if they had pumped the car full of bullets killing him after he ran into the ditch.

And maybe not even then.

[Orrex]

76. They elected to pursue him away from the scene. That's vigilante justice.

Whether or not they shot him thereafter is irrelevant.

And maybe not even then.

You are not considering this rationally. You have declared that the "good guy" is a hero, and you will consider nothing to the contrary. If voluntarily pursing a shooter from the scene of a shooting and voluntarily re-engaging with a shooter is not considered vigilante justice, then what is?

[AtheistCrusader]

97. That's not what Vigilante means.

“a person who violates the law in order to exact what they believe to be justice from criminals, because they think that the criminal will not be caught or will not be sufficiently punished by the legal system.”  

That's a vigilante. Neither of the first responders has been suggested to have violated the law (except perhaps the speed limit) in acting. Neither was motivated in a quest for un-met justice from the legal system. They were engaging an active shooter where law enforcement had not yet arrived. It wasn't about punishment at all. They didn't punish him. They stopped him.

This falls within self defense, in the scope of protecting the self, or others.

[sammythecat]

101. Maybe to stop him from doing whatever else

he planned to do next. Who knows what that might have been, maybe just get away and hide, maybe go to his mother in law's house, no one knows, but if he could be stopped that would be a good thing.

[sarisataka]

40. Should the neighbor

Be charged?

[B2G]

41. With what?? nt

[sarisataka]

50. The above poster claimed

It is vigilante justice. I am following that to the logical conclusion.

[B2G]

58. OK, should be interesting. nt

[Orrex]

42. That depends, no?

The details aren't yet available.

Of course, Texas legislators worship guns more than they love their own children, so obviously they will resist any suggestion that this "good guy" is anything less than a sainted national hero.

As far as I'm concerned, when such a "good guy" voluntarily enters the scene of an active shooting, then the "good guy" bears full responsibility for what he himself does with his guns. If the "good guy" can't use his weapon in a safe and responsible manner (i.e., without risking further harm to bystanders), then he has no business engaging the shooter in the first place.

[sarisataka]

56. You have determined

From your pov that the intervention was unnecessary.

The "good guy" saw an armed person leaving a shooting scene. He safely (?) engaged the shooter and did not harm any bystanders.

Is this "vigilante justice" or what evidence would convince you it was a justified shooting?

[Orrex]

67. I don't believe that I claimed that it was unnecessary.

Forgive me, but I've been engaging with dozens of gun advocates on this, because they come out in force to defend guns in the wake of each week's mass shooting. As a result, I may lose track of my exact wording.

Is this "vigilante justice" or what evidence would convince you it was a justified shooting?

At present, it appears that the shooter voluntarily engaged with the shooter. I may be mistaken on this, because I've read conflicting accounts in this thread and others. Did the "good guy" take it upon himself to enter the scene? If so, then that's vigilante justice.

If Kelley shot at him first, and if the "good guy" fired back, then that's a justified shooting. If the "good guy" left the scene, retrieved a firearm, and returned to exchange fire, then he voluntary fled the scene and voluntarily re-entered the scene.

What would convince you that it was not a justified shooting?

[B2G]

73. Vigilante justice

n. someone who takes the law into his/her own hands by trying and/or punishing another person without any legal authority. In the 1800s groups of vigilantes dispensed "frontier justice" by holding trials of accused horse-thieves, rustlers and shooters, and then promptly hanging the accused if "convicted." A mother who shoots the alleged molester of her child is a vigilante.

[Orrex]

78. Thanks for confirming!

someone who takes the law into his/her own hands by trying and/or punishing another person without any legal authority.

That's pretty much exactly what I've been asserting. Thanks for the confirmation!

On what legal authority did the "good guy" pursue Kelley from the scene? What was his intent in pursuing him from the scene?

[B2G]

79. How did pursuing him either

'try' or 'punish' him?

[Orrex]

98. Of course, he didn't simply pursue him.

Nevertheless, he did voluntarily pursue the shooter from the scene and then voluntarily drove him (i.e., "forced him" ) off the road, presumably at speed. If I deliberately ran you off the road, I'd be charged with attempted homicide, even if I claimed that "I wanted to stop him."

I'm not an idiot: no Texas jury would convict this "good guy," even if he'd tortured Kelley to death over a period of six months.

[B2G]

102. He didn't force him off the road.

He was behind his SUV at the time it hit the curve and went into a ditch.

You know what? This is going nowhere. Believe what you want, makes no difference to me. I think it's pretty apparent what happened and your suppositions do not change facts.

[AtheistCrusader]

86. To stop him. Which they did.

They didn't punish him. They trained a weapon on him and waited for law enforcement, not knowing if he was alive or dead, ready to fight, surrendering, etc.

They ran him to ground and waited for LEO. I don't know what more you can ask for in this case. If they'd shot the shit out of his car, I think you could make a case for something like vigilantism, in a way, but no jury in the land would convict.

[AtheistCrusader]

82. Some break in continuity.

Once engaged, pursuit acceptable to me.

If he didn't see the shooter, didn't engage the shooter, but someone said 'it was bob' and the guy drove to 'bob's' house on a lark and shot him there... now we're in vigilante territory.

To engage an active shooter, even a fleeing one, not 'justice' in my book. It's self defense/defense of others. A police officer would also shoot him, and their bar for 'reasonableness' for deadly force is higher than it is for non-law enforcement. The assumption would be this person is a continuing danger to other lives, even though they are fleeing.

The responders were extremely reserved, and honestly, did everything right as far as I can tell. If they were vigilantes, the suspect's car would have looked like swiss cheese.

[sarisataka]

83. Honestly nothing (see edit)

I believe it is justified to engage an armed person at the scene of a mass shooting

Caveats to that statement:
- bystanders must be taken into account. I agree that even a "good guy" is responsible for his shots and may not turn a busy street into a free fire zone
-the murderer must be identified- this is related to the above point as not every armed person may be involved. An armed person may be the murderer, a victim, another bystander or even a law enforcement officer; if it is not clear, shots must be withheld.

I believe In this situation the neighbor who opened fire did so with justification and without endangering further victims.

edit: I would change my view the shooting was justified if it is shown bystanders were in the line of fire and put at risk by shooting at the murderer.

[dumbcat]

90. I would refer you to Texas Penal Code Chapter Nine

What the neighbor shooter did is authorized and encouraged by Texas law. Texas law also authorizes deadly force to be used to "prevent the escape" of many offenders.You can call it vigilante justice if you wish. You probably wouldn't like to live in Texas.

[Orrex]

109. Then Texas law is fucked up

But of course we already knew that.

[AtheistCrusader]

112. It's allowed in Washington.

Not for property. (Texas has some laws allowing force over property, and I would think that's messed up)

It's allowed in a lot of states actually.

[B2G]

38. The autopsy has already been done.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/us/texas-church-shooting/index.html

[Orrex]

48. Out of curiosity, is it clear that he was shot by the "good guy?"

The article isn't clear on this point, stating only that "Kelley, 26, was also shot in the leg and torso by an armed citizen."

Of course, that doesn't specify which armed citizen. It seems at least possible that someone in the church returned fire.

Obviously, this can easily be determined through ballistic analysis, and we should await confirmation because it's actually quite important.

If he was shot by someone in the church, then that shooter apparently didn't do anything to stop the rampage, nor did the "good guy" in that case.

Then again, even if he was shot by the "good guy," it's still not clear that the "good guy" did anything to stop the rampage.

[B2G]

49. I have seen no accounts of anyone firing back from inside the church.

Have you? One would think that would have come out by now.

I think this is a huge reach, but that's just my opinion.

[Orrex]

54. I made no positive assertion about it...

except to say that it seems a reasonable question to ask.

If it turned out to be true, do you agree that it would change the nature of the discussion?

[B2G]

60. No, because he left alive. nt

[Orrex]

88. What does that mean? And how do you not see a difference?

If he was shot by someone in the church, than that person had no verifiable impact on the massacre in the church.

If he was shot by the "good guy" outside of the church, then the "good guy" had no verifiable impact on the massacre in the church.

Whether or not he "left alive" is irrelevant, because gun advocates claim that the presence of guns is sufficient deterrent.

[AtheistCrusader]

94. Not trying to be an ass but that sounds like a strawman.

"Whether or not he "left alive" is irrelevant, because gun advocates claim that the presence of guns is sufficient deterrent."

I don't know any gun advocates that suggest it's sufficient deterrent. It's an opportunity to meet force with force, that's all. (And gun free zones are typically referred to or thought of as 'soft targets'.)

Another example might be the Tyler Texas Courthouse shooting. The bad guy shot his wife and killed her. Wounded his son. Once the armed responder arrived, the bad guy's attention was focused on him, and him alone. The shooter was about to execute his own son, up until that moment. Once it became a fight, force on force, the 'mass shooting' was over. (The responder didn't survive the fight, pistol against a rifle is a shitty scenario) After that, the shooter fled. Saved the kid, and bought SWAT enough time to respond.



When I carry a firearm, it's concealed. (Lawfully.) It's not a deterrent at all, because no one knows I'm carrying. (Except the police and other people who carry, we tend to be aware of each other, various cues) In fact, one of the reasons I prefer concealed carry, is that I don't want to hand initiative to some shithead with a gun that wants to start something. I want to be 'just another guy in the crowd' not designated target 0. I cannot protect myself, nor anyone else, if the announcement of hostilities is someone shooting me in the back of the head because I had a gun on my hip, and presented a clear danger to their plans of robbery or murder or whatever.

[AtheistCrusader]

91. No, because the shooter was still functional.

He fled, still armed. Whatever hypothetical return fire he may have received from the church didn't solve the problem.


A hypothetical. If three officers shoot at an armed suspect, and the first two cleanly miss or fail to seriously wound, and the third officer puts the suspect down with a single shot, does that make the attempted shots by the first two officers unjustifiable or useless?

I would think they at least contributed even if they didn't hit. Covering fire, drawing fire, any harassment whatsoever of the suspect seems useful to me, in that instance.

[Paladin]

16. Exactly so.

That little church had already been turned into a slaughterhouse by the time any "Good Guy With A Gun" showed up.

[jmg257]

18. I need to find these reports you are citing...

How did he"get into a gunfight outside the church" if he had no ammo?
(And good thing - get shot twice in the process by a simple brave civilian?)

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/texas-church-shooting/texas-church-shooter-may-have-been-targeting-his-mother-law-n817961

"Kelley, who was 26 and lived in nearby New Braunfels, had been wounded earlier when he got into a gunfight outside the church with a man who lived nearby and was armed with at AR-15 assault-type rife Martin said."

"Martin disclosed that at least 15 empty 30-round ammunition magazines were found at the church, along with "hundreds" of shell casings" — more than he would ever need, Freeman said, to "take care of the mother-in-law."

This is interesting:

Inside the church, Kelley's rampage was cut short when an unidentified good Samaritan wrenched the rifle out of his hands.

Kelley then fled the church, where he was confronted by an armed man who lives nearby, and a gun battle erupted."

Apparently he had more then 1 gun on him - go figure.

[bluestarone]

26. so my question is

why the hell aren't they giving credit where credit is do? i mean to the unarmed person in the church that grabbed the gun away? Interesting if true right? Don't want to give credit to unarmed person right?

[jmg257]

34. Thats incredible isnt it? Talk about a hero!

[hamsterjill]

25. I don't know a damned thing about all of this, but...

I live in SA and on the local news right after the shooting there were gun experts talking about how the shooter could have stood outside the church and killed just as many people as he did walking into the church - because the bullets from that type of gun (the AR15) could have easily gone through the walls of the building and killed people. These same gun experts also mentioned that a bullet from this gun could actually kill more than one person because it has the intensity to travel through one body and into another one. (Sorry for the gore, but that's what they said).

I don't have a link for any of this because I was watching the local news when I saw this.

So, okay, the "good guy with the gun" had the same type of gun (the AR15). He fired at the shooter who had walked out of the church. Can anyone tell me for certain that the bullet from the "good guy" went only into the shooter? What if that bullet didn't stop at the shooter?

These are the types of things that *I* worry about when "good guys" try to be heroes.

[Morris64]

143. As someone who has some experience with ballistics through various media,

Pistols and shotguns (slug/buck) tend to penetrate further and with less deviation than the rounds typically fired by an AR15. Rifle rounds are often firing at such higher velocities that they begin to quickly degrade upon striking barriers/targets. That’s why they are effective killing machines compared to pistols as the projectiles dump maximum energy into whatever they strike rather than simply punching through.

There’s a website called box o truth that has some plain Jane demonstrations of this effect. It may be counter intuitive, but rifles are easier to shoot accurately and travel less through barriers. Makes for an overall safer defensive weapon for all involved but the initial target.

[leftynyc]

27. Let's leave aside

your obvious attempts to pretend this person wasn't a brave man who did what he could to make sure the murderer got caught and doesn't deserve thanks (I can only guess the reasons for that) - your entire premise falls apart since he obviously had more ammunition - he shot himself. They also said there was more than one other gun in his car. Please don't make things up in your hurry to make a point - it just makes it easier to ignore what else your argument is.

[HopeAgain]

32. Can we at least agree assault weapons should be banned?

All this talking and gunsplaining is exactly why America has become one giant armed camp.

[leftynyc]

74. Absolutely

But I fear that's closing the barn door after the horse has fled. There are already so many of these out there.

[aikoaiko]

37. You're wrong. The VA Tech shooter used two ordinary handguns.

At close range and in an confined area, handguns can be used to kill a lot people.

I don't know where you get the idea that massacres can't happen without rifles.

[Hoyt]

53. Ban semi-auto hand guns too or, at a minimum, make them not easily concealable.

[aikoaiko]

70. That ain't going to happen. Plus, concealability has little to do with massacres.

[mainstreetonce]

44. The president is wrong

He said the neighbor"neutralized the shooter."

No, the neighbor is a hero,but the killer drove miles after he was shot.

He died of a self inflicted wound.

He had more than one gun.

Neighbor says Kelley had a handgun when they exchanged fire.

[Hoyt]

51. Yep. Kelley had already thrown his AR15 away and was essentially unarmed when he was shot.

I'm glad the neighbor intervened, but it was too late and he still could not stop an unarmed man who was probably in a state of confusion after the massacre. He also could have forced Kelley back into the church or running into someone else's house.

[jmg257]

72. So there was no gunfight, no exchange of fire, outside the church? Saw that reported numerous times.

"Martin didn't identify the "hero Texan" who traded shots with Kelley, "

"Kelley, who was 26 and lived in nearby New Braunfels, had been wounded earlier when he got into a gunfight outside the church with a man who lived nearby and was armed with at AR-15 assault-type rife Martin said."

Kelley then fled the church, where he was confronted by an armed man who lives nearby, and a gun battle erupted."


Maybe he had one of the handguns?

" A Glock and a Ruger handgun were found inside the Ford Expedition he had been driving..."

[mainstreetonce]

84. Yes,he had a handgun

when confronted outside the church and exchanged fire with the neighbor .

[jmg257]

85. Thanks!!! nt

[mainstreetonce]

92. Good accounting by the neighbor

https://m.

Answer a lot of questions .

[Hoyt]

96. No,it APPEARS he was unarmed at that point and the cowboy still couldn't stop him.

"the local said that although Willeford has no military background, he didn’t hesitate when he came face to face with the suspect — and managed to squeeze off a round that struck the gunman, who had dropped his Ruger AR-15 variant."

http://nypost.com/2017/11/06/sharpshooting-plumber-fired-shot-that-took-down-texas-church-gunman/


I agree that more will come out which might provide clearer details, but it's clear the neighbor was a bit late and may have shot Kelley while Kelley was unarmed. I'm glad the guy intervened, but I don't think this should be a signal to every microdick (a moniker I read here the other day) they need another gun so that they too can be a hero).

[jmg257]

99. But then there is this...

"I pulled up to the intersection where the shooting happened and I saw two men exchanging gunfire, the other being a citizen of the community,” he said.

So the cowboy did pretty good after all.

[Hoyt]

106. You can go out to the range and practice what you believe happened. I'll trust the accounts

that say he had dropped his rifle until I see something definitive that indicates it was a "shootout" like on TV. Again, I agree both men who went after Kelley deserve whatever accolades they get. But, we don't need every immature individual running out to buy a gun or more guns in the hope or getting their 15 minutes of fame.

Fact is, it is highly likely there were people packing in the church. Neither they or this guy stopped the killing of 25 or so innocent people.

[jmg257]

110. You can trust anything you like. Also note the rifle was actually supposedly wrested from his hands

in the church.

But he had a handgun when confronted by the civilian.

[Hangingon]

120. So far as I have heard, Kelley had not dropped his rifle. He seems to have lost it when hit.

[jmg257]

122. Thanks - one article said it was wrested from his hands. He did have a handgun though.

per the civilian shooter.

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/texas-church-shooting/texas-church-shooter-may-have-been-targeting-his-mother-law-n817961

"Inside the church, Kelley's rampage was cut short when an unidentified good Samaritan wrenched the rifle out of his hands."

[Hangingon]

136. Didnt hear that. thanks

[IronLionZion]

55. Dude had already left the church and was trying to escape

and since the 2 good guys with guns shot at him, he decided to shoot himself dead.

[ClarendonDem]

63. Your facts arent supported

By the WaPo story

[IronLionZion]

66. "The gunman fled and ultimately shot himself in the head, officials said."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/11/07/as-texas-town-mourns-details-emerge-on-gunmans-methodical-tactics-in-church-massacre/?hpid=hp_rhp-banner-main_texasshooting-739am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.c1549b4501d1

[ClarendonDem]

75. This article makes it clear he saved lives

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/11/07/inside-the-texas-church-she-thought-it-was-her-turn-to-die-then-outside-a-man-appeared/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_mm-texassurvivor-622am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.255883ce3026

[IronLionZion]

81. And this entire article is about a 95mph car chase

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/11/06/an-unlikely-hero-describes-gun-battle-and-95-mph-chase-with-texas-shooting-suspect/?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.171ff8d72bc4

An autopsy of Kelley showed that he was shot twice — once in the leg and again in the torso — before shooting himself in the head, Martin said during a briefing later Monday.

The shooter was driving away trying to escape

[Still In Wisconsin]

87. My Dad carried an M1 Garand in Korea... 8 round clip. That's it... served him very well.

That private citizens are able to get 30 round clips and larger at a basic gun store is insane.

[3catwoman3]

113. Insane is right.

Nobody, but nobody, needs these goddamn high capacity magazines as a private citizen. No need to be able to spray bullets around like a hose sprays water.

[Still In Wisconsin]

126. "No need to be able to spray bullets around like a hose sprays water."

Right you are. Furthermore, there's no need to do that in a military situation either. There's one application for "spraying bullets around" as a tactic and it is this: wounding/killing a large number of people in a tight group who aren't expecting to be shot at- i.e. mass murder/ terrorism at some public event.

[EX500rider]

128. "Furthermore, there's no need to do that in a military situation either"

Well that's not true, full auto and large clips are used during military assaults so the enemy keeps their heads down while you advance.

[Still In Wisconsin]

129. Yeah that's true. I should have emphasized the word "randomly."

Certainly fully automatic fire has its place on a battlefield, especially as supression... but not random. That's why those 50-cals are mounted and not fired "Rambo style."

[MurderMittenLiberal]

93. Oh ffs...

The armed citizen was a member of the NRA and he stopped this shooting from becoming even worse. It might not fall in line with how you feel about the NRA or gun control but this is a fact. Don't distort the story to support your ideology., there is enough of that in the world already. A brave NRA member helped stop this event, FACT.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

134. Did the "armed citizen" need an AR-15 with 30 round clip to stop the carnage. What does the NRA

have to do with the narrative since you managed to work into each sentence. Maybe the fact that the NRA is responsible for far more gun deaths than this guy prevented, like the 26 that were already killed that morning by a military-style assault rifle that the NRA lobbied to make available to this killer. FACT!!!

[MurderMittenLiberal]

152. No

He didn't need an AR to stop this man, but it is his right as an American to have it. The reason I mentioned the NRA is because of the blind hatred of the organization on DU. Do I like the NRA, no, am I a member? no, but acting like they are the anti christ because they pump money into the GOP is moronic. "The NRA is responsible for far more deaths than this guy prevented" well yeah no shit sherlock. Does that mean that 100% of what they do is bad? NO.
"the NRA lobbied to make available to this killer. FACT!!!"
No, not FACT. The NRA lobbied to loosen restrictions on people with mental health issues, if The Air force did their job by properly labeling the shooters file, he wouldn't have been able to purchase it anyway. I won an AR-15, I am very liberal, I hope I don't cause you to short circuit with that sentence.

[Gothmog]

104. K&R

[Snake Plissken]

105. According to Paul Ryan the people in that church were praying for him to run out of ammo, and not ..

for him to stop killing people because "prayer works"

[lark]

108. High capacity magazines and bump stocks must be totally eliminated.

Background checks for all purchases including for mental illness, gun registration and no more than 1 gun per 6 months, gun locks mandatory, these are all sensible laws that most Americans support.

[ClarendonDem]

130. How would a mandatory gun lock law

Or 1 gun every 6 months have prevented this shooting? I’m in favor of reasonable gun control laws, but not those that are disconnected from reality.

[lark]

151. No, gun locks are not about wholesale slaughter, but the family version.

Children and impaired adults would not have access so less lives lost. Remember most gun slaughter isn't out in the open but happens in homes every day so is part of the issue. The guy in Vegas had an arsenal, harder to get an arsenal at 1 gun every 6 months. These are sensible, more sensible than continuing to tolerate ever escalating levels of deaths.

[Bettie]

111. That was what I read too

But their "good guy with a gun" narrative is all they have anymore other than the new wrinkle of "well, really, it is god answering their prayers to be delivered from evil by killing them".

The world is just nuts these days.

[SunSeeker]

116. K & R

[Justice]

118. Whether shooter could have killed more is besides point; he killed 26 - already unacceptable

"Good guy" with gun confronted shooter AFTER he murdered 26 and wounded so many more.

Like saying Las Vegas shooter was stopped by police and if he wasn't could have killed hundreds more.

Totally ignores all of the people they both killed BEFORE any intervention by police or "good guy"

[workinclasszero]

119. He used a military weapon designed to kill as many human beings as possible

in the shortest amount of time.

His weapon of choice worked as intended by the manufacturer.

What kind of insane society would allow the sale of such weapons of mass destruction to virtually anyone at all??

This pig was a damn criminal and had NO PROBLEM purchasing his murder machine thanks to the NRA and republican gun humpers.

[ClarendonDem]

131. He had no problem purchasing the gun

Because someone screwed up reporting his crimes. The NRA has nothing to do with it. Why do we insist on blaming someone (or an organization) that isn’t at fault?

[Calista241]

121. Magazines are expensive and cumbersome

Even our soldiers carry a limited number of magazines when out on partook. Most of them carry addition unloaded ammunition so they can reload expended magazines when necessary.

Cops, for the most part, carry 3 pistol magazines on their belt when our on patrol. They do this to reduce weight, and 3 magazines will cover 99.9999% of the encounters hey find themselves in. Most cops though, will have additional loaded magazines in their car that they can grab if needed.

In addition, most magazines will not be completely full. If you have a 30 round magazine, for the most part, you’ll put a maximum of 26-27 round in the magazine. The compressed spring makes it extremely difficult to load the last two rounds, and the chances of a misfire, or failure to chamber a round go up significantly when springs are fully compressed like that.

[NickB79]

137. AR mags only cost $10-$20 each

And you typically get 3-6 magazines in the box when you buy an AR.

If you have trouble fully loading a magazine, you have weak hand strength, and any magazine that jams when fully loaded is defective. No soldier I've ever talked to ever went into battle with partially filled magazines.

[Morris64]

147. While your heart is in the right place,

The same cannot be said about some of your facts.

[vkkv]

123. Anyone who thinks they need firearms to protect themselves from the government

isn't mentally fit to own guns.

[Bucky]

132. But there's no way the guy who shot the shooter could have known that

The two guys who chased him off clearly Act heroically and in the interest of their neighbors, and we're engaged in a dangerous situation.

You can favor gun control, like I do, and still admire The bravery of the men who acted to end the slaughter. Us gun control nuts and the guys who tried to the church rampage share the value of saving lives

I mean it's not like we can assume he walked out of the church brushing his hands and saying, "Well I got that out of my system, guess I'll go home and wait for the cops"

[lame54]

135. If he ran out of ammo - how did he...

Shoot himself
He had the means to kill others

[Lee-Lee]

138. Dont get in the way of their attempts to rationalize away the guy being a hero

The idea that a good guy with a gun could possibly exist is too much for their brains, so they are going rationalize every excuse possible to say the guy wasn’t what he was.

[7962]

141. Sorry, but you're wrong. He exchanged fire and was shot twice.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/us/texas-church-shooting/index.html

[pansypoo53219]

142. those multi bullet things should ONLY be available in war or ranges. next the NRA w/ let us each

own grenades & nukes. are we civilized? the NRA are tyrants.

[Morris64]

148. Posts like this are why folks have a hard time taking proponents of gun control seriously.

[Beartracks]

144. So, a bad guy without a working gun wasn't able to shoot people. Hm.

Interesting.

=================

[brewens]

145. I suppose they may be able to determine if he had another stop/s and more targets planned.

There could be clues to that on his phone or PC possibly. It could be the guys that were chasing him only prevented his holing up somewhere and ending up in a standoff. That would be good, but a long way from a good guy with a gun saving the day.

[Skittles]

150. "saving the day" after 26 people were murdered

VIA GUN

[brooklynite]

153. Is your objection that the shooter had stopped shooting, or the other guy had a gun?

If the other guy had tacked him, not knowing if the shooter had more ammo, would he be a hero then?

[Paladin]

154. Yet another attempt by pro-gunners to turn a mass murder into a 2nd Amendment triumph.

They've been repeatedly trotting out this shuck-and-jive ever since Charles Whitman's 1966 UT tower killings---and it's never, ever persuasive....