Texas

What We Know So Far About the Texas Church Shooting

26 people have been killed at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas.

|

Yan Bo Xinhua News Agency/Newscom

Investigators Monday were scrambling to find a motive for yesterday's deadly mass shooting at a church in a small town outside of San Antonio, Texas.

On Sunday, a gunman identified by the Texas Department of Public Safety as 26-year-old Devin Patrick Kelley opened fire during a service at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, killing 26 people, and injuring another 20.

Kelley, from nearby New Braunfels, was an Air Force veteran who was court-martialed in 2012 on charges of assaulting his wife and child. He was sentenced to 12 months confinement and received a "bad conduct" discharge in 2014.

Update: Law enforcement officials say that Kelley's motivations were "domestic" in nature. In a press briefing this morning, Texas Department of Public Safety spokesman Freeman Martin said that Kelly's mother-in-law regularly attended the First Baptist Church where the shooting occurred, and that she had recieved "threatening texts" from Kelley prior to the shooting. Martin declined to go into detail on the content of those texts.

Law enforcement officials confirmed that Kelley did not have a license to carry firearms, but that he was able to pass federal background checks for four seperate weapons purchases in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017.

"This is a person who had violent tendencies, and who was a powder keg waiting to go off," said Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on CBS News. Abbott said that Kelley tried to get Texas gun permit prior to the shooting and was denied.

Domestic violence convictions, along any felony conviction and dishonorable discharges from the military would disqualify one from gun ownership. Kelley's "bad conduct" discharge would not have disqualified him from firearm ownership, and it is not clear whether his assault conviction would have.

However, the fact that the crimes he was convicted of carried a combined sentence of over a year in jail may have made him ineligible to buy or possess a firearm.

According to law enforcement officials, Kelley purchased a Ruger AR-556 rifle from an Academy Sports & Outdoors store in San Antonio, Texas. Officials say that he passed a background check at the store.

The shooting occurred at around 11:20 a.m. when Kelley—dressed in black and armed with a Ruger AR-556 rifle—opened fire in front of the First Baptist Church entering the building and firing on the worshipers inside.

A local resident, who reportedly lived next to the church, engaged Kelley in a firefight as he left the building. According to law enforcement, Kelley then dropped his weapon and fled in his vehicle, being pursued by armed resident.

After an 11-mile chase, Kelley lost control of his vehicle and crashed on the side of the highway. Law enforcement arrived, and found him dead in his vehicle from gunshot wounds. It is not known whether the wounds were self-inflicted or not.

Despite so much unknown about the attack, political reactions are already starting to pour in.

President Donald Trump has said the shooting was a result of "a mental health problem at the highest level", adding that "this isn't a guns situation."

Longtime gun control advocate Sen. Diane Feinstein disagreed, saying in a Sunday statement that "this latest mass shooting comes just one month after the country's deadliest mass shooting, and we're still trying to garner support for even the most basic steps to reduce gun violence."

Reason will update this post as more information becomes available.

NEXT: Senate Fiscal Hawks Could Strangle Tax Reform in its Crib

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. ‘adding that “this isn’t a guns situation.” ‘

    I understand what he’s trying to say. I just wish he’d say it better.

    1. When has “Mr. Inarticulate” ever said anything “better?”

      1. He never says anything better because you can’t be better than the best. He has the best words.

        1. His party platform says to preserve and defend the Second Amendment, and I have yet to see this prez turn against his party platform. The loser looters say to ban guns, which is unconstitutional, but leave cars and trucks legal–though there are more fatalities involved with them. The voters had their say…

          1. I am in flavor of gun control…

            One should control one’s gun very, very carefully, when blowing up the brains of evil assholes like him who done in these church-goers…

            (And one doesn’t really need a badge to do this).

            1. My favorite flavor of gun control tastes like a fresh massacre.*

              *So it smells like Hugh Akston’s breath.

              1. We did not evolve to cook, or indeed even clean, animals before we eat them.

                1. From what I understand about current theory on human evolution, modern man has less powerful jaws and teeth because of tool using and cooking favored less resources going to jaw muscles and strong teeth. So you are incorrect.

                  1. And there was an almost one-to-one swap of gut mass for brain mass.

                2. We also evolved to die by the age of 30 in any number of horrible ways. I’ll take the modern alternative.

              2. Start earning $90/hourly for working online from your home for few hours each day… Get regular payment on a weekly basis… All you need is a computer, internet connection and a litte free time…

                Read more here,,,,, http://www.onlinecareer10.com

            2. And you should always do a background check before firing your weapon.

          2. His party platform says to preserve and defend the Second Amendment,

            His party platform? I thought it was his oath of office…

    2. Yeah, he should listen to his wingnut advisors and blurt out something about Chicago. He fucks up the GOP talking points a lot like when he said mothers should go to prison for abortion.

      1. Don’t you have a rapist to nuthug?

      2. You lost, turd. Grow up and get over it, loser.

      3. Hey that abortion comment was brilliant. Yes it indicated that he doesn’t know what the fuck he’s talking about, but it also showed that he was capable of taking the pro-life stance to its only logical conclusion.

        1. It’s just so strange how you and PB always show up in the same thread at the same time since I guess

          1. Like you and Sevo?

            Tony and I have butted heads over policy. I am 100% opposed to gun control and Single Payer for example.

            1. “Like you and Sevo?”

              Are you ACTUALLY RETARDED?

              “Tony and I ”

              save it tony.

              1. I don’t have the energy to switch back and forth between handles for no discernible reason. I am and always have been Tony and no one else.

            2. But you’re for Socialism, so…. its only a matter of time that you want government into everything including gun grabbing and health care.

              1. Fuck you, you little lying fascist.

                1. Aw, poor Butt has been exposed for the liar that he is.

                  Remember when the Socialists tried to say that Nazis are not socialists?

              2. They should both be put to death.

            3. ” I am 100% opposed to gun control and Single Payer for example.”

              You make this claim now and then, yet never criticize by name the advocates for gun control and Single Payer.

              1. Are you kidding? I have been highly critical of the idiot Bernie Sanders – that Glass Steagall CAUSED THE RECESSION old fool. He is for single payer and gun control. I would rather have Trump as POTUS than him (if he was saddled with a Dem Congress. Yes, The Con Man over Bernie – that wrecks your little delusion.

                1. Palin’s Buttplug|11.6.17 @ 11:33AM|#
                  Are you kidding? I have been highly critical of the idiot Bernie Sanders – that Glass Steagall CAUSED THE RECESSION old fool. He is for single payer and gun control. I would rather have Trump as POTUS than him (if he was saddled with a Dem Congress. Yes, The Con Man over Bernie – that wrecks your little delusion.

                  We all see that you added a caveat to Trump being what you wanted. He is only okay if there was a Democrat Congress.

                  There is no Dem Congress, so Trump is not what you wanted. You wanted Hillary.

                  It is so east to point out your Bullshit.

            4. Tony and I have butted heads

              Is that what you pervs call it now?

              -jcr

              1. But which one if the power bottom?

        2. Trump is actually better off knowing absolutely nothing about the subject matter in question – like on judges he would nominate. Someone from the Federalist Society just handed Bannon a list of anti-abortion judges and that was the end of that. Trump had his list.

          1. Palin’s Buttplug|11.6.17 @ 11:17AM|#
            “Trump is actually better off knowing absolutely nothing about the subject matter in question”

            And you’re just the turd to make sure he does.

      4. Hey, man, are you going to ever apologize for calling me a fucking liar over the campus show trial tribunals thing? Are you actually a serious, objective person or just a person who trolls people you don’t agree with on the internet?

        Time to decide…….

        1. WTF? Campus show trial tribunal? I have no idea what you are saying.

          1. A couple of weeks ago we were commenting on an article – I don’t remember the subject of the article – and I made the comment that the Dems were responsible for the Title IX zero due process debacle. You went ballistic – called me not just a liar but a fucking liar, or something close to that. Challenged me to name one Democrat that favored those things.

            I replied by mentioning the infamous “Dear Colleague” letter from the Obama admin that started the whole mess and you went totally silent..

            Admitting that you were wrong is part of being an adult, dude. Your overreaction was ridiculous.

            1. I got into a Title IX discussion?

              1. Yes. C’mon man……..

            2. Bevis, let me explain.

              When you mention Obama, PB’s blood rushes to his vagina and he has trouble remembering anything after that.

            3. Neither PB nor Tony has ever admitted being wrong, despite receiving ostentatious ass-beatings on this site in nearly every thread ever.

              If the subject is health care or the environment, you can GUARANTEE that Tony will come in and get humiliated nonstop – while claiming victory, and ENTIRELY ignoring every one of the pieces of evidence that prove him an uneducated, dishonest blowhard.

              If the subject is Obama or Democrats, you can GUARANTEE that PB will come in and get humiliated nonstop – while claiming victory, and ENTIRELY ignoring every one of the pieces of evidence that prove him an uneducated, dishonest blowhard.

              This shit has borne out for yeeeeeeears.

              1. I accept whatever 99% of experts say on the subject and am fully comfortable with revising my thoughts as they revise theirs, like an adult grownup with half an education.

                You think there’s a giant global conspiracy of those 99% of experts and all national and international policy bodies, and every politician and citizen in the world not in the Republican party to make Al Gore rich on a solar panel scheme.

                Ow, my ass. The beatings, won’t they ever stop.

                1. Accepting what you’re told without questioning is what fucking children do, not a supposedly educated adult.

                  Science Damnit.

                2. You go girl. Enjoy being a sloppy bottom.

      5. Coathanger-only abortions are in the God’s Own Prohibitionist party platform too. Prohibitionist mystical bigots have controlled the GOP since 1928.

        1. What an idiotic comment. Do you scientifically not consider a baby to be a person until the umbilical cord is cut? Or are you rational and educated enough to understand that sentience (which should be the scientific standard for personhood) occurs months earlier?

    3. The President Trump quote seems like a straightforward and understandable statement to me. Specifically, how do you wish he’d said it better?

  2. Come on now. Let’s put politics aside and pass some common sense gun control.

    1. As soon as we outlaw hatred toward Christianity.

    2. Common sense gun control?

      Like teaching everyone how to shot bullseyes every shot? Control that gun to shoot effectively and accurately is great advice.

    3. well played.

  3. “Well, 26 people died, so, even though it could have been FAR worse, the guy who shot him isn’t a hero and this isn’t a victory for armed citizenry”

    That’s something I learned. That there are people who are actually stupid enough to say that.

    I will say though, we, the armed citizens actually do not count it as a victory. We don’t reduce tragedy to silly politics and scoreboards.

      1. is that supposed to mean somethng?

        or are you just upset tjat i wont let people forget you’re a rape apologist?

        1. He is trying to spit out that Chicago has the worst gun control in the USA next to NY City and the amount of violence coming out of Chicago actually shutters National crime stats. He wanted to also say that gun control clearly does not work compared to a more armed populace.

          He also wanted to say that good thing there was an armed neighbor in Texas to chase off the shooter, possibly prevent more innocents being injured, and making sure police knew who and where the shooter was.

          Thanks Butt. Its the best thing your robot self has said today. Beep beep.

          1. Yeah, BLOOP and DERP. I knew you would know.

            1. I used Google translate to translate your stupidity into non-socialist sentences.

            2. I thought it was Blurp and Slurp.

          2. It’s pretty clear he just wants the ability to give people he doesn’t agree with the Rand Paul treatment, and disarm them so they can’t do anything about it.

            As an aside, why aren’t asshole gun controllers pilloried endagering women and old people? I mean, PB soesn’t have a priblem with rape, but actual non-sociopaths get a pass too.

        2. Do you mean a rape apologist, or a rape-rape apologist?

      2. I will admit, Trump is highly Derp. But, for years I’ve yet to see you write a single disparaging thing about Obama or Hillary. This, despite your claim to be the only pure classical liberal/libertarian. How is that possible?

        1. Obama is dead wrong on Citizens United. NO (ZERO) political speech should be constrained or restricted. His wrongness did not make its way into policy however. I have been critical of Obama on quite a few of his policies. I have told you the same thing before so fuck off.

          I will be glad to debate you if you are capable. Although Obama was no libertarian my only claim was that he was more libertarian than the other choices of the time (Dubya, McCain, and Romney).

          1. Yes, Obamacare is totes libertarian. Phone and pen policy is totes libertarian. Using the IRS and DOJ for personal and party gain are totes libertarian. Obama’s entire reign was a disgrace. And all you can do is snark, “Chicago, derp”. As if Chicago isn’t an even greater disgrace and Team Blue disaster. Fucking liar.

            1. Obamacare is 1000x better than Medicare or Single Payer and of course its not libertarian. But the GOP gave us something worse – Medicare Welfare Part D in 2003.

              The rest of your argument is bullshit CT. Obama didn’t make the IRS go after the Teabaggers. Some overzealous embed named Lois something did.

              1. I can’t seem to remember when the Obama DOJ took action against Lois Lerner.

                1. Lerner was rightly fired and the head of the IRS replaced.

                  She did nothing criminal.

              2. Palin’s Buttplug|11.6.17 @ 11:39AM|#
                Obamacare is 1000x better than Medicare or Single Payer and of course its not libertarian. But the GOP gave us something worse – Medicare Welfare Part D in 2003.
                The rest of your argument is bullshit CT. Obama didn’t make the IRS go after the Teabaggers. Some overzealous embed named Lois something did.

                Free market health insurance and medical care is 10000000000000x better than any socialist government Medicare, ObamaCare, or Single payer.

                Just like Obama never knew nor okayed the FBI wiretapping of political opponents based on a dossier?

                1. Like the Corleones, the Obama crime family also has ‘buffers’ between Obama and his button men.

            2. Obama was wrong on Operation Chokepoint. So wrong he should issue an apology. Wrong on “assault weapons”.

              But as a free-trade capitalist he was great. TPP should be in force but for the Trump idiot and Bernie/Liz Warren idiots in his own party.

              Now admit I as critical of Obama.

              1. Now admit I am critical of Obama.

                1. So you were critical of Obama when Obama was in office? When Obama was seeking reelection?

                  You must have been critical of Obama’s chosen replacement Hillary when she was determined to not only continue Obama’s failed policies but add in more?

                  You don’t even criticize the media’s continued attempt to keep Obama relevant after Obama got the boot from politics.

              2. I’ll admit I finally shamed you into making a statement. It’s about time.

          2. Obama had zero Libertarian bones in his body. He was a socialist thru and thru.

            The fact that W., McCain, and Romney are not Libertarian-ish (at all), really does not help your point.

            1. You’re an idiot not worth responding to. Tom is at least trying.

              1. Aw, poor Butt cannot respond because he knows that I am correct.

    1. Would be better to have taken him alive. He was even white.

      1. to pay for his upkeep? don’t be an idiot

        1. To study him. God knows we’re going to keep letting crazy fucks shoot up children, so we might as well figure out some of the reasons.

          1. nah, i think im sticking woth dont be an idiot bruh.

          2. I think we really need to look deeply at the nexus of LGBT supremacist and the role they have in promoting anti-religious animus. Certainly you are no stranger to eliminationist rhetoric. By any means necessary like your shock troops say. Own your allies.

            1. Wake me in a million years when gay atheists have approached the level of mass murder that religious wars have. Hundreds of millions dead because Protestants believed slightly different bullshit than Catholics. What a waste of several centuries that was.

              1. well, amazingly, people more sophisticated than you can be concerned about multiple things.

                However, it is important to know your limitations, so kudos to you for that.

              2. I wholeheartedly reject institutions and beliefs that have led to millions dead, because… well… wait a minute. I….

                Never mind.

              3. Well, Stalin liked to spend his spare time doodling on pictures of nude bodybuilders, so maybe you won’t have that long to wait.

          3. Someone’s been watching Netflix’s Mindhunter.

            1. I bet it all comes down to the shooter’s mother.

          4. Looks like he was an atheist, so you and PB should have the best insights.

          5. To study him. God knows we’re going to keep letting crazy fucks shoot up children, so we might as well figure out some of the reasons.

            Let’s say they figure it out and have a bona fide recipe for driving people murderously crazy. Then what?

            Oh, you mean study him to prevent people from becoming murderously violent/crazy or prevent them from doing so recursively once they have!

            OK, so then they have a bona fide recipe for making normal people murderously crazy and murderously crazy people normal at will. Then what?

            Ah, right… Phase 3: Profit!

            1. Or we could just take all the guns away so as to minimize the carnage.

              1. *alcohol/cocaine/bibles/korans/meth/PCP/mean words

      2. You know Tony, if some whackjob was trying to kill you I’d still risk my life to defend you. Even if I knew who you were beforehand.

        1. But wouldn’t it be better for all concerned if the whackjob had access only to blunt instruments in lieu of a military-grade arsenal?

          1. Let me check the Constitution: nope.

            The government shall not infringe on People’s right to keep and bear arms (any armament).

            1. Nukes?

              Sounds like that stupid amendment needs to be repealed then.

              1. Why are you cool with women being raped and abused? Or is this where you pretend that guns aren’t used by women to prevent violence upon them?

                Nah, they can wait for cops right?

                1. We have the most guns by far, the most gun violence by far, and the biggest prison population by far. What about this situation says to you that things are going swell?

                  1. “What about this situation says to you that things are going swell?”

                    Nothing. That’s why I asked you why you’re ok banning an effective tool tgat women use to prevent violence being inflicted on them.

                    Then you dodged. That, really, is kust more proof that you’re PB. He is ok with rapes too.

                  2. Tony|11.6.17 @ 11:47AM|#
                    We have the most guns by far, the most gun violence by far, and the biggest prison population by far. What about this situation says to you that things are going swell?

                    “most guns by far”: Most guns per capita? Most guns per country? You might want to explain more.

                    “most gun violence by far”: More gun violence than Africa? More gun violence than the USSR? More gun violence than Nazi Germany? More gun violence than Afghanistan?

                    “biggest prison population by far”: Per capita? Total prison population? More than the USSR had in Gulags? More than China has in forced labor? More than North Korea has in reeducation camps?

                  3. “most guns by far”

                    99.9% of which will never be used in crime.

                    “most gun violence by far”

                    Not even remotely true, unless one uses the standard disingenuous “developed countries” metric, which becomes rather absurd when one realizes that Baltimore, New Orleans, St. Louis, Chicago, etc., have the same murder rate as most South American countries… and the same percentage of guns (70 to 90%) in said rates. What can we conclude from this, but that the former cities have the same number of would-be killers as the latter, and are thus comparable only to them? Unless you’re arguing that “number of consumers” has no effect on black market incentives…

                    “biggest prison population by far”

                    Without which we would return to our 1980s-vintage 9 to 10 per 100k murder rate… including a 3.3 per 100k NON-GUN murder rate, 3x that of Britain’s *overall* rate. Remind why we’re supposed to assume that the USA is demographically comparable to Europe and the Anglosphere again?

                    1. Because it would be gross if we had to compare ourselves to countries with BROWN people.

              2. “Sounds like that stupid amendment needs to be repealed then”

                Go for it. Or do you have a mandate to bypass the Constitutional process?

              3. Sure. Go ahead and develop nukes in the USA.

                You will need someone to voluntarily sell you refined uranium 235. You don’t wanna waste your time with trying to detonate U 238.

                Or you will need a nuclear reactor to breed some and the you need to increase its mass to get a nice clump of enriched Uranium. You will need a device to set off a critical chain reaction.

                Good luck with that.

                Let me know when you are almost complete and what your plans are, so I can turn you in to the government for wanting to commit a terrorist act against people who dissent from your socialist ideas.

          2. Sure.

            When there’s a proposal that does that, and doesn’t look like the unilateral disarmament of the law-abiding, let me know.

          3. When that “blunt instrument” is 38,000 lbs of truck barreling towards you at 25 MPH… No.

            And even if the killer is determined to kill indoors for some reason, a bag of pipe-bombs filled with ball bearings and KClO3 or a box-tube Luty submachine gun is not a significant improvement.

            1. So your argument is that guns are not specifically designed to be efficient killing machines (and automatic weapons at that).

              So why can’t we let people be happy with trucks and household cleaners for their self-defense?

              1. Because the latter are ONLY useful for *mass* killing. Although a Luty SMG *would* be effective for self-defense… too bad that only law-abiding, non-violent people would be likely to obey the prohibition on them, then.

                Guns, by contrast, are designed to be efficient COMBAT killing machines. That is a completely different animal to MASS killing. Combat weapons are designed to engage armored, cover-taking, fire-returning enemies at range, under unplanned and dynamic conditions. Mass killings, by contrast, take place at the time and place of the attacker’s choosing, against unarmored, untrained, unarmed soft targets. The advantages of an AR-15 over, say, a 19-ton truck- namely, that it can be used in enclosed environments, while taking cover, and can kill through barriers at long range- are irrelevant, because in the event the former weapon is taken away, the attacker, choosing his target at his leisure, can simply change his plan and attack an open-air crowded venue like, say, the Nice Bastille day celebration, instead of whatever hardened, in-door target he had originally planned.

                And in the event an in-door target (like a church) is insisted upon, the same logic applies to homemade SMGs- against armored, shooting opponents, a garage SMG is too inaccurate, weak, and short-ranged to be of use… but against regular church-goers, its 500 RPM will have the same effect as the AR.

                1. *SMG = submachine gun
                  *RPM = rounds per minute

                  1. Still need you to define AR, MASS, COMBAT, and ONLY for me.

                    1. AR = Armalite Rifle

                      MASS = Mass

                      COMBAT = Combat

                      ONLY = Only

                      #IGotYourBack

                    2. This is why we’re late night drunkposting besties.

                    3. If I had known I would make friends in this commentariat I would never have started commenting here.

      3. It’s okay to be white.

        1. No it’s not. That implies a serious vitamin D deficiency. You want a nice peach color.

      4. They announced this morning that he shot himself. There wasn’t going to be any taking him alive.

  4. Facebook is full of “he is another white terrorist, not a muslim” however he is not a terrorist he is a murderer without political intent which is what terrorist do, intent to cause fear in order to make change. interesting, that describes Antifa quit well

    1. His ex-wife’s parents are members of the church, although they weren’t at the service yesterday. Explains why he would choose a church in the boondocks 40 miles from his home. Looks as if his motive was simple emotional revenge. Guess they need to finish the investigation, but Occam’s Razor…….

    2. He’s an anti-Christian storm trooper. He and tony subscribe to the same political ideology. Of course tony is trying to change the subject and hide how aroused he is by dead Christians.

      1. He wanted to kill his ex-wife’s parents and oodles of their friends. Just happened that the place he thought they’d be was a church. Anti-Christian has nothing to do with it.

        1. Some reports claim him to be atheist so targeting the church could be terroristic but if his goal was only that church then not necessarily terrorist in action.

          1. I used to live in San Antonio. Between his home near New Branufels and the church in Sutherland Springs he would have driven within a mile or two of maybe 100 Christian churches. I don’t know how many Christian churches there are in San Antonio, but it has to be in the hundreds and all of them are closer to where he came from than Sutherland Springs. So why did he drive past hundreds of churches to shoot up a church in the middle of nowhere 40+ miles from his house?

            His ex-wife’s parents. They attended the church. If they’ve lived there a while it might have been his ex-wife’s childhood church. Hell, he and his ex-wife might have been married in that church, who knows? Maybe the pastor of the church counseled her to leave the guy after he beat her up. Speculation there of course, but it appears pretty obvious why the guy selected that specific location.

            Sure looks like domestic violence rather than an intended blow against Christianity.

            1. This. There are hundreds of churches closer to where he lived than this one way out in the middle of nowhere. Most of those are bigger than this one. Common garden wife beater, nothing more.

      2. Waitaminnit!! Are we talking about Bin Ladin, Ayatollah Khomeini or the International Socialists who helped out troops conquer Christian Germany in 1945?

  5. “A person convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime which includes the use or attempted use of physical force or threatened use of a deadly weapon and the defendant was the spouse, former spouse, parent, guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited in the past with the victim as a spouse, parent, guardian or similar situation to a spouse, parent or guardian of the victim.”

    Taken directly from the FBI NICS webpage section on the DQ criteria for firearm purchase.

    How did he pass the background check? Or was he DELAY and the FBI never got back to them within 3 days?

    1. No man, we clearly need more and better laws.

      1. I’d prefer less and better government!

      2. Can’t we just ban murder?

    2. The government cannot even enforce the laws it already has on the books.

      I doubt that its because any infringement of the People’s right to keep and bear arms is unconstitutional. This would include background checks and limitations for ex-felons and domestic wife-beaters.

      1. The government cannot even enforce the laws it already has on the books.

        Few, if any, can. Remember, Anders Breivik killed more people than Stephen Paddock.

    3. The guy favored the initiation of force against the unarmed, so clearly he was OK by DemoGOP kleptocracy standards. And last time I looked, both those parties were controlled by people who believe in an undead resurrected magician who never wrote a word on paper and was never spoken of until a century and a half after he was supposed to have lived twice. I personally wish those congregants had shot him dead in the doorway. There is something un-Texan about simply letting berserkers run amok like that.

      1. Rabid anti-Christianity is a beautiful thing. Its purveyors can’t miss a single opportunity to throw darts, regardless of the subject matter or its relevance (usually none) to the subject matter under discussion.

    4. If a check is “delayed” then the sale is delayed. Put another way, a buyer has to CLEAR a background check in order to complete the purchase. So, for some reason he cleared the background check when he should not have. And so, clearly, we need more background checks.

  6. According to law enforcement officials, Kelley purchased a Ruger AR-556 rifle from an Academy Sports & Outdoors store in San Antonio, Texas. Officials say that he passed a background check at the store.

    It’s a good thing there was a loophole for this nut.

    1. Put down the glue bro, you stopped making sense hours ago.

    2. “It’s a good thing there was a loophole….”
      There is- the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.

      1. Isn’t that precisely the point? I’d prefer to let local communities make decisions about how people can acquire a firearm and not have nanny-staters in Washington tell us how to live our lives.

        1. Then change the constitution. It’s common sense.

        2. Luckily YOU don’t get to decide what human rights are protected by the Constitution. Smarter people set that up for you to undermine during your pitiful life.

          I guess you will be 100% behind local communities deciding they don’t want nanny-staters in DC having such a big welfare state and shrink the federal government by 50%+?

  7. I wonder which federal agency was behind this attack.

    1. Trick question, there was no agency involved. The guns made him do it.

      1. Get your head out of the sand!!!

        1. OK fine, the Federal Austerity Department of Violent Gun Rhetoric and Scary Tweets
          new under the Trump administration, obviously

          1. I have a better one….

            Center Of Vicious Federal Equalizers For Everyone

            1. Whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa.

              Take a chill pill, Conspiracy Sister.

    2. ObamaCare website information department.

  8. Hey guys,

    I’m sorry. It looks like the attacker shot himself and was not, in fact, engaged by John Wayne. It’s going to be a rough couple days until the next Dana Loesch commercial when we can all blow our loads into our NRA underwear.

    Ahhh… I can’t wait.

    1. Actually, looks like he was hit by “John Wayne” (who, by the way, does not consider himself to be a hero and wants to avoid becoming famous for doing what he did).

      http://abc13.com/youngest-texa…..d/2609069/

      You can be dismissive of “John Wayne” all you want, but it sure looks as if the guy put his life at risk to try to keep the asshole from shooting more people. And may have succeeded, depending on what the asshole was planning to do next. Which makes him braver than you, for sure – why try to save people when you can just spew shit on the internet. I mean, sometimes people you disagree with deserve credit, but fuck objective fact when it doesn’t fit within your political worldview. Amirite?

      1. It just seems to me a thin reed upon which to hang the “good guys with guns” theory on when 26 people died prior to it’s somewhat questionable implementation.

        Maybe if we restricted the ability of people to acquire rifles at gun shows then zero people would have died. I call that my “nutcases shouldn’t be allowed to own a gun, period” theory. It’s been backed up by tons of papers in the scientific literature. You should go check some of the references out. I recommend pubmed, for starters.

        1. ^
          I call this the “nutcases spout bullshit” theory.

        2. What are you talking about? So-called mass shootings are nowhere near the leading cause of death by guns. There are fewer people killed by rifles of any type than there are people killed by blunt objects or by texting while driving. The majority of gun deaths in the United States (50-75% depending on source) are associated with the inner city drug trade. Get rid of those and the US murder rate plummets below all of your wonderful socialist republics. Of course, realizing that would require honestly digging into the statistics.

          1. Who said anything about that? I’m for getting rid of this horribly written Amendment and letting local communities decide how they want to regulate gun ownership. I’m personally apathetic, but if pressed I would say I am for the legal right to own a gun subject to moderate regulation. But I’d be ok living in a place with very permissive gun laws and in a place that outlawed gun ownership altogether. Let’s get Washington DC out of our lives and let the people decide how to regulate themselves!

            1. The “militia” clause has been pretty well understood in a legal context since the founding of the country.

              1. Sorry. Responding to the wrong thread.

            2. “Maybe if we restricted the ability of people to acquire rifles at gun shows then zero people would have died.” Seems like stats about rifles is pretty topical.

            3. And if those local communities decide to “moderately regulate” marijuana? Alcohol? Gay marriage? Black voting?

            4. “To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.”
              –John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of the United States

          2. The majority of gun deaths are suicides.

            1. Sorry. I meant to say the majority of gun murders. You are correct.

        3. Maybe if we restricted the ability of people to acquire rifles at gun shows then zero people would have died.

          The shooter bought the gun at a sporting goods store. He passed a federal background check he shouldn’t have.

        4. He didn’t buy the weapons at gun shows. Thanks for playing

      2. AmSoc is just another progtard punk. He probably fantasizes about being spit roasted by PB and Tony.

    2. He was still engaged by John Wayne. Does your nervous system consist entirely of a pea and a spinal cord?

      1. I’m with you. It’s terribly written to boot…

        A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

        What the fuck does that mean? Does the antecedent phrase apply or not? Fuck, man, learn to write.

        1. Read the Federalist Papers or any legal text that came out shortly after the Constitution was written. It’s not that difficult.

          Ever read Shakespeare? Writing trends change over the course of hundreds of years. This really isn’t that difficult.

          1. Its hard for him to read because the 2nd Amendment protects the human right to defend yourself with arms. This goes directly against every socialist’s desire to take over and control people.

            1. It protects the right of people to defend their states with militias.

              The amendment is obsolete. Or it was until activist Justices decided to invent a whole new meaning that absolutely isn’t anywhere in the text.

              1. I always forget the “deem obsolete” process of amending the constitution.

              2. Tony|11.6.17 @ 3:18PM|#
                “The amendment is obsolete.”

                So long as there are thugs like you and commie-kid around, it’s not only not obsolete, it is an instruction manual.

              3. False. The texts of the Federalist Papers, all legal texts of the day, all court decisions, etc. made it clear that the 2nd Amendment refers to an individual right.

              4. “It protects the right of people to defend their states with militias.”

                Via private household weapons, as is made clear from the briefest of overviews of contemporary discussions about it.

                “The amendment is obsolete”

                It wasn’t in the 1960s. Always bizarre how leftists (correctly) fear that institutional oppression and pogroms are never that far away, yet somehow think that militias are “outdated”. Newsflash: those insurgencies that keep kicking Western ass throughout the ME? Those are militias, just with an iOS upgrade for the 21st century.

                “activist Justices”

                Because the court rulings that ended abortion restrictions and institutional marriage inequality were TOTALLY just echoing what the Founders intended.

                1. I believe governments should be at liberty to ban the ownership of weapons of large-scale destruction. If the 2nd Amendment prevents that, then the 2nd Amendment is bad law and should go.

                  But it doesn’t say that. You can’t just ignore the first half of the sentence. Let everyone own a gun once they have trained for militia service. I’d settle for that.

                  1. I’m pretty sure you’ll settle for the status quo: impotently bitching about the tedious constitutional process of getting the laws you desire.

                    Really, what else are you going to do about it?

                  2. And you can’t just ignore the middle part of my response. How likely do you think it is that the people running your theoretical government-regulated militia in, say, Alabama circa 1961, would have been “down” with letting black people join? With letting them train? With letting them take their guns home?

                    The whole point of the 2A- of the entire Bill of Rights, actually- is to protect MINORITY rights. The majority doesn’t need guns to rebel- sheer numbers are enough to overwhelm any government resistance, French Revolution style. It is the minority that needs every martial advantage it can get, to secure its own rights by its own hands. But guess who controls your state militia? Hint: the same people who brought us the “poll tax”, the segregated public bus, and, incidentally, some of America’s first gun control laws.

                    “State-run militia” is just a fancy way of saying “2 white guys and a black guy voting on who gets to be armed”.

                  3. 10 U.S. Code ? 246 – Militia: composition and classes

                    (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
                    (b) The classes of the militia are?
                    (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
                    (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

              5. “Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American…[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”
                –Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

                “Whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.”
                –Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

                “The right of the people to keep and bear … arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country …”
                — James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

        2. It means miserable excuses for humanity like you don’t get to make the rules.

        3. “What the fuck does that mean? ”

          This really says everything necessary to judge you.

        4. Take out the first and last commas and it makes perfect sense in modern English.

          1. James Madison provided (more than once) more clean versions.

            “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country …”
            — James Madison, I Annals of Congress 451/452, June 8, 1789

            https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage? collId=llac&fileName=001/llac001.db&recNum=227

            1. Clear, not clean.

            2. Clear, not clean.

        5. It was English written so long ago, no one understands what it possibly means.

          You know: like Shakespeare.

  9. Trump has said the shooting was a result of “a mental health problem at the highest level”

    Oops.

    1. It’s mental health problems all the way up!

      1. It’s a mental health pyramid made of mental health pyramids made of mental health pyramids made of mental health pyramids…

        1. It looks like Carrie Mathieson’s corkboard.

  10. A local resident, who reportedly lived next to the church, engaged Kelley in a firefight as he left the building. According to law enforcement, Kelley then dropped his weapon and fled in his vehicle, being pursued by armed resident.

    After an 11-mile chase, Kelley lost control of his vehicle and crashed on the side of the highway. Law enforcement arrived, and found him dead in his vehicle from gunshot wounds…

    Maybe we should start calling the cops “second responders”.

  11. The problem won’t go away until the Left Wing takes some responsibility for its violent hatred against half of Americans and admit that sometimes they are flawed in their thinking, even if they are always rights no matter what.

    1. The problem won’t go away until the Wingnuts take some responsibility for its violent hatred against half of Americans and admit that sometimes they are flawed in their thinking.

  12. A guy on MSNBC just said “The *problem* is that in the US people have a Constitutional right to guns.” The host then pressed him and he vehemently agreed that this should not be the case and they all had a good time agreeing with each other that *something* has to be done even though some people *might* have valid reasons to have a gun (didn’t elaborate, but I’d guess it was government agents enforcing the state’s 5-year plan).

  13. The politicization of these incidents, particularly absent any specific knowledge of the background or the motivations for the shooting, is beyond disgusting. There is no more reason to think that any new gun control laws would have prevented either event than there is to conclude that mental illness is at play (beyond the obvious fact that anyone who would commit such an act must be insane).

    Everyone just has to stop. Libs have to stop screaming for solutions for problems they can’t even identify, and conservatives have to stop identifying problems they don’t know exist. Let the investigations play out, let’s find out what actually went on (if indeed we are able to) and then talk about what, if anything, could have been done to prevent the tragedy knowing full well that odds are the answer will be “nothing”.

  14. the author keeps saying the killer couldn’t buy a gun legally and then explains how he bought one legally.

    for clarification, having a ‘gun permit’ in texas is only necessary if you want to CARRY a pistol. they aren’t required for long guns. and the permit isn’t required for purchasing any kind of gun.

  15. One thing we know for certain is that the 2nd Amendment in the US Constitution is a flaw which needs to be corrected.

    1. How about the “Commerce” clause anf the “Nessary & Proper” clause FIRST!.

    2. But it wont be changed.

      Socialist murders hardest hit!

  16. What I’d like to know is what drug(s) he was on.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.