Posted on 06/23/2014 5:15:26 AM PDT by Q-ManRN
Court documents relating to the June 10 murder/suicide at Reynolds High School in Troutdale, Oregon, show the gunman stole the AR-15 he used to commit the crime.
He also had a handgun which he had stolen.
President Obama and Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) called for the passage of expanded background checks in the wake of the heinous crime at Reynolds High School. But background checks do not stop thieves.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Great example! You really have to look at the way liberals use words like “universal background checks” and “gun control” which imply that the government is all-powerful.
ThunderSleeps wrote:
Anyone who thinks “universal” background checks will stop illegal firearms transfers - I invite you to consider a “universal prescription” law. Do you think requiring all drug transfers have a doctor’s prescription would stop the illegal drug trade? No, of course not. Well, the belief that “universal background checks” will have any similar impact on illegal firearms is exactly the same kind of idiocy.
I keep mine in a five foot safe. A professional burglar would take about 15 minutes to empty my safe and get away with what's left of my collection (after that incredible boating accident).
Just how secure to you think your guns are?
Stealing is still a criminal act folks! We do not blame people whose cars are stolen and then used as a getaway vehicle in a crime even if they left the car doors unlocked. We might say the car owner should have been more careful, but we do not say that the car owner is responsible for a crime. You are on a slippery slope obsessing about how they stored their firearms.
Mr. Quarterpanel wrote:
He had obtained the firearms from his home. They had been secured in the house, but Padgett defeated the security measures, the police chief said
I saw that.
I still don’t know what that means. Secured how? He picked the lock of a gun cabinet? He torched through the safe door? Looked under the bed? He opened a closet and “There it was”?
Just how secure to you think your guns are?
Safe enough.
A professional would not bother with my (or your) stuff. It is just not worth the trouble to them. Given enough resources and time, any safe can be broken into, even by an amateur.
I seriously doubt that this high school kid had the skill set to defeat even a cheap Chinese safe big enough to hold the AR-15. This leads me to think that the term "Secured" was used rather generously in this case.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.