The Kaufman DA had put all his guns away hours before he & his wife were murdered.

[GreenStormCloud]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/son-slain-da-guns-put-killing-18915157#.UWSTM74o6os

Slain Kaufman County District Attorney Mike McLelland kept a gun "in every room of his house" but couldn't reach one when his killer or killers came into his home Easter weekend because he had put the weapons away just hours before to protect visitors, his son said in an interview published Tuesday.

"They had a party the night before and he gathered up all his guns and put them away in a bag so that his guests didn't stumble across them," J.R. McLelland told The Dallas Morning News

SNIP

"He kept a gun by every chair," J.R. McLelland said. "He kept one on both sides of the TV, there was a shotgun hanging on the back of the couch and two by his bed."

SNIP

More at link

A few days ago a gun controller posted a thread that the DA's guns didn't protect him. That is because they had been put up and he was unarmed when the killer(s) crashed in.

[still_one]

1. Maybe the question should be asked is how the thug who killed him got his weapons

Of course it is easy to play Monday morning quarterback. I can do it to. Yesterday a 3 year old grabbing his dad's pistol on the bed and shot his mom

[GreenStormCloud]

2. Prime suspects are a violent white supremest drug gang.

Such gangs will always have weapons. After all, if they don't obey laws about murder and drugs, what makes you think they will obey gun laws?

[gcomeau]

4. Gun control laws impact illegal weapons availability.

It has nothing to do with how likely criminals are to obey laws. Of course criminals don't obey laws. If that was a coherent argument we wouldn't have ANY laws because the criminals are just going to break them anyway!

[GreenStormCloud]

7. The laws provide means to punish criminals after the fact.

The threat of punishment acts as a deterrence.

It doesn't take a large number of guns to supply the criminal underworld with all the guns they need. Mexico has extremely strict gun control, yet the cartels have lots of full-auto weapons. Those full-auto weapons were NOT bought in an American gun store. The cartels smuggled them in from other sources.

[gcomeau]

10. Amnog other things, yes.

"It doesn't take a large number of guns to supply the criminal underworld with all the guns they need. Mexico has extremely strict gun control, yet the cartels have lots of full-auto weapons."

Yes, let's use a nation in the middle of a massive drug war with a completely ineffective law enforcement apparatus as the yardstick for measuring the effectiveness of gun laws. Why exactly are we not looking at the effectiveness of gun control regulations in nations far, FAR more comparable to the US like Europe or Canada?

[GreenStormCloud]

11. Are you claiming that organized crime doesn't have guns there? N/T

[gcomeau]

13. Where?

Canada or Europe? Yes. But NOWHERE NEAR AS MANY because they're harder to acquire and retain. And homicide rates are FAR LOWER as a result.

[GreenStormCloud]

16. Their homicide rates were also much lower when they didn't have any gun control.

There was a time in the UK and Canada when there was no gun control at all. Blood didn't run in the streets then.

[Starboard Tack]

25. Makes you wonder doesn't it?

Why didn't blood run in the streets of Canada and the UK? Because they don't resolve their differences with guns, that's why. They figured out a long time ago that a bloody nose, followed by a nice cup of tea, is preferable to death.

[gejohnston]

27. no, because they didn't have slavery

and what amounts to apartheid. That isn't to say that Canada is free of racism and discrimination, it isn't. Just ask any Aboriginal today or Japanese Canadian in the 1940s. They also have less of inequality of wealth. Canadian murder rates mirror ours. They go up when ours does and drop when ours does, but staying the same percentage. That said, when you move to the national level to the local level, Minnesota and Manitoba have about the same, with Manitoba being slightly higher than Al Frankin's state..

Most of our murders are in cities that have over 250K people. Canada and UK have fewer cities that have that population. As usual, you confuse mutual combat like bar fights with criminal predator and prey, which are two different things. The latter don't have cups of tea afterwards. The UK tops the US and other OECD countries in these areas.

People in the US do not "resolve differences with guns". We ended dueling probably before the UK, since it was mostly an upper class thing anyway.

Question I have is, is the Home Office giving accurate statistics?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/police-fail-to-report-14m-crimes-710742.html

Not that that sort of thing would be unique to the UK
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eli-b-silverman/low-crime-rates-nypd-eli-b-silverman-john-a-eterno_b_1772489.html

[Starboard Tack]

38. Ah, so slavery is the excuse. I guess I've heard it all now.

That has to be the lamest excuse I've heard yet for an out-of-control gun culture.

Did you think I was referring to dueling when I talked about resolving differences?

The UK has a history of gang violence which far exceeds anything I've witnessed in the US. I'm talking of gang battles involving hundreds and even thousands, armed with knives, coshes, bicycle chains, broken bottles. Battles that lasted several days. Lots of injuries. No guns. No deaths. Check out the Mods and Rockers in the mid 1960s. They took over the beaches in several seaside towns from Brighton to Clacton.
Criminals in the UK very rarely use firearms, because the price of failure is too high, and it's playing against the rules. Yes, the criminal class has some very strict rules, which includes "no guns". Those who break that rule are usually outcast and dealt with by their own.
Regarding the "cup of tea" thing. If you want to get a sense of the difference in culture, check out the movie "Sexy Beast".

Crime reporting varies from state to state, country to country, town to town. I never place much credence in numbers that benefit the very people who record those numbers. However, homicides get reported. It's hard to fudge those numbers.

[gejohnston]

43. were the mods and rockers organized crime?

like our gangs? Or were they sub cultures that were antagonistic towards each other? Like say, hippies and cowboys in my part of the country. BTW, our gangs, including criminal street gangs, back then mostly used tire chains and knives, rarely guns. In 1965, guns were used in only half of our murders, yet our gun laws were much laxer. Even IL and CA was nothing like now.

Excuse? Well, South Africa's gun laws are about like Australia's, check out the murder rate there.

Judging from Wiki, my suspicions were correct, perhaps a media creation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mods_and_rockers

It is hardly the same as Gambinos vs Columbo or MS-13 vs whomever or Hells Angels vs Outlaws.

[Starboard Tack]

44. No, they were not organized crime in the classic sense of the word.

But they were organized.
The problem has nothing to do with what gun laws were back then, either here or in the UK. It's more about the culture of gun proliferation on the streets.

It was not a media creation. I was there. It was very real. Thank god they weren't into guns.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/18/newsid_2511000/2511245.stm

[gejohnston]

45. they were not involved in criminal enterprises

like these guys.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/oct/25/gang-shootings-armed-police-london

To correct the writer on a couple of things, semi automatic and submachine gun is an oxymoron. Calling it a carbine would be more accurate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_MP5#Semi-auto_only_variants

[beevul]

40. And the US isn't in the middle of a massive drug war?

And the US isn't in the middle of a massive drug war?


The drug war may not be as "hot" here, as it is there, but it and all the other things that go with it, are every bit as present here, as it is there.

[gcomeau]

41. Try to tell the difference

...between a "war on drugs" and a "drug war".

[beevul]

42. I believe I just pointed that difference out...

To the discerning eye, anyway.

[Straw Man]

20. How many times ...

If that was a coherent argument we wouldn't have ANY laws because the criminals are just going to break them anyway!

... must we hear this old chestnut before it gets retired forever?

Malum in se versus malum prohibitum: the former applies to acts that are evil in and of themselves, like murder, and the latter to acts that are merely against the law, like possession of a firearm would be if some had their way. The thing is that possession of a firearm isn't overtly harmful unless a "real" crime is committed with that firearm, like armed robbery or murder. Obviously firearms aren't malum in se, or we wouldn't let police officers have them. Murder, on the other hand, is malum in se, and prohibitions against it are among the cornerstones of civilization.

Outlawing guns to keep them out of the hands of criminals is a futile undertaking; it merely keeps them out of the hands of those who are unlikely to do any harm with them anyway, i.e. people who are inclined to obey the laws.

[Starboard Tack]

26. Not all guns are outlawed in Canada or the UK

They are restricted, as to type and usage, which is very different. Also, it works.
When the tools of murder and mayhem are restricted, there tends to be less of both, and with very little complaint from the people, who don't feel they are being persecuted or deprived of their civil rights.

Fact is, every society has a tolerance level when it comes to violence, especially extreme violence. The US has a much higher tolerance for violence, probably because it was created through violence and evolved with gun violence as a constant. The over-the-top gun culture, capital punishment, paramilitary LE, foreign military interventions to keep oil flowing and misplaced patriotism all feed the mentality of "us vs. them". But it is starting to change. Public opinion is becoming more nuanced every day, as Americans have more and more access to the world outside. They are realizing that the US scores poorly on issues such as Gun Violence, Healthcare, Capital Punishment, Environment and Pollution, Renewable Energy, Energy Efficiency, Consumerism and Foreign Policy.
All thanks to the internet and the digital age.

[gejohnston]

29. define works

Since Canadian and UK murder rates were still 1/3 ours when their gun laws were about the same or laxer. Canadian federal laws were laxer than ours in many ways until 1977. While handguns needed licensing and background checks since 1934, machine guns did not. They only required simple registration since the 1950s and became prohibited in 1977.

Did the use of guns in murders drop?
Did those laws lead to drops in murder rates?
While Canada's did drop, but there is no evidence that the gun laws had anything to do with it.
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/legal12b-eng.htm

While the use of guns is dropping, knife murders seem to be rising
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/12/04/homicides-statistics-canada-2011.html

BTW, Wyoming and Vermont have lower murder rates than seven provinces/territories
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/legal12b-eng.htm

Wyoming and Yukon both have gun ownership rates in the 60 percentile. In all fairness, so does NWT.

[gcomeau]

3. So now...

...we're supposed to believe the solution is to turn every room in our home into an armory and never be more than a few feet from a weapon even in your own house and *then* everyone will be "safe"?

Was that the message here?

[GreenStormCloud]

5. The DA was a special case.

His assistant had been murdered two months before. He had reason to believe that he was also targeted. I was posting to counter the anti-gun person who tried to claim that guns were useless for self-defense because the DA was murdered. His guns were not available.

FWIW - I do have a guns in different rooms of the house.

[gcomeau]

8. Ok, so

His guns were" not available" because they were put away. In the house.

Tell me, is it not generally claimed that responsible gun owners keep their weapons properly secured in, say, a gun locker? And not... oh... laying around loose just anywhere where anyone could pick them up? Does that not also make those guns "unavailable" to at least the exact same degree?

[GreenStormCloud]

9. There are special gun safe that can be open in a couple of seconds.

And guns can be available if there are no children in the house. My wife & I are senior citizens with no children living here. When we are at home, our guns are available.

Some guns, that are of little value for self-defense, are put up.

[gcomeau]

12. A couple seconds huh?

As opposed to how long it takes to fish a gun out of a bag?

[GreenStormCloud]

14. Depends upon where the bag was.

I doubt that he had it in his hand.

He had specific death threats against him after his assistant was murdered. He should have had a gun on his person at all times, even during the party. And he should have put the guns back in their places when the last guest left.

Since I am an ordinary senior citizen I don't think I need that level of readiness.

[gcomeau]

15. I doubt anyone carries a gun safe around in their hand either. -nt

[GreenStormCloud]

17. Usually they are mounted close to a bed.

But most folks aren't in the same level of danger that the DA was in. And the finger safe can be left open when the resident is home and awake with no kids in the house.

[rdharma]

6. "DA's guns didn't protect him"

"A few days ago a gun controller posted a thread that the DA's guns didn't protect him."

Well, what he posted is STILL TRUE! Ain't it?

[Lizzie Poppet]

18. Yes, it's still true.

And still of little (if any) relevance...

[kudzu22]

37. Come to think of it, the police didn't protect him, either

That's why the controllers think we don't need guns, right? The police will protect you?

[AtheistCrusader]

46. Neither did the French Army.

Approximately as relevant.

[bluedigger]

19. Seems like he would have been better served with a good security system.

His problem wasn't a lack of guns, but a lack of preparedness. Maybe he should have got a dog and one less gun. A good video system would at least have given the authorities more evidence to pursue the killer(s).

[GreenStormCloud]

22. Dogs are easily killed by bullets.

It is amazing how many people here think that dogs are somehow bulletproof. An alarm system would have merely made more noise, in addition to the 20+ gunshots. If the murderers weren't scared of making noise with their guns, what makes you think that they would have been chased away by an alarm?

Have you ever heard of ski masks? Great for defeating cameras.

[bluedigger]

23. My dog barks like shit when somebody is at the door.

Which would provide me ample time to arm myself if I had reason to believe I was being targeted. Can you pull a ski mask over your vehicle? A good security system has camera surveillance on the grounds and street, not just the door. Cameras and cloud storage are no more expensive than weapons. Are you just being purposely obtuse, or do you not recognize the utility of multiple deterrents?

[GreenStormCloud]

32. The door was kicked in.

How long do you think it takes to break a door down?

What makes you think the killer used his own car? Stealing one for the hit is the way professional Mafia hit men do it. (There are several books on the subject that are by ex-Mafia hit men.)

The real question is why are you so hard-core against guns being available for self-defense. Certain other steps would help, but that help would be small against someone who has decided to kill you.

Are you just being obtuse, or do you really believe that guns are of no value for self-defense?

[bluedigger]

33. Why are you creating straw men?

Where did I say I was against guns for self defense? Oh, that's right, I never did. In fact, I own one.

All I said was that his self defense measures were inadequate. That's self evident, isn't it?

As for the dog, she barks when you get to the walk, not just at the door. If I owned property, she would bark at a stranger who got within a 100 feet of the door or any strange car that entered the driveway. They are territorial like that.

Professional hit men like that loser piece of shit that killed the Colorado DOC? The one who was apprehended with the same vehicle and weapon used in the crime, along with his pizza man disguise?

Come on back with some more piss poor arguments and I'll be happy to shoot those down, too.

[GreenStormCloud]

35. When you said this:

Maybe he should have got a dog and one less gun.

Lots of anti-gunners want dogs instead of guns. A few weeks ago I was arguing with a guy that claimed that his dog would chew up a burglar before the burglar could shoot the dog.

I have granted that the other measures could be helpful, but not as good as having a gun readily available.

[ileus]

21. I don't get my home SD pistol out of it's safe on weekends where

we have other kids staying over. (every two or three weekends)


Maybe it's irresponsible for me to do so...

[CreekDog]

24. yes, when murderers are after you, being surrounded by unsecured, loaded weapons makes you safer

[coldmountain]

28. We need something better than guns

[AtheistCrusader]

47. I tried, but they say the death rays are on back order.

[oneshooter]

30. The problem was that they WERE secured, and not readly available.

[CreekDog]

31. and it's safer to have unsecured guns

even when you are asleep?

[oneshooter]

36. In this case the answer would be yes.

[Eleanors38]

39. Mine is right by the bed when at home. Ready...

Otherwise, it is in a lockbox, and the box removed elsewhere. All other guns in a safe (unloaded), and ammo locked in a separate box.

[quadrature]

34. this story is very hard to believe

which of these stories, do you believe
is more likely?

.............
1. the DA, who feared for his life,,
had 47 loaded guns in his house,
but had to lock them up to host a party.
He did not keep one on his person.
Two minutes after the party,
ninjas dropped from the ceiling
and shot the two residents.

....................
2. the DA's wife did not allow guns in the house

[AtheistCrusader]

48. I believe option 1.

Option two seems unlikely given his vocation. Such marriages aren't terribly likely to prosper long run, in any other case.