Naked gunman kills four in Nashville Waffle House

[Credo]

1 hour ago, Opl said:

You'll find some additional détails here :  

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/22/waffle-house-white-house-shooting-545411

Thanks for that link.   It's a start, but I wonder if any of our legal-eagles know how this quasi-confiscation of weapons came about.   It seems very odd that the guns would be taken (legally) and then given to someone (his father).   He is an adult.   If you get caught with drugs, they don't return them to a family member, that's for sure.   

 

I know of a group of 4 guys who went deer hunting using snowmobiles.   They hauled their two snowmobiles in a pickup and they chased down a deer and shot it.   Everything used in the poaching incident was confiscated -- the 4 guns, the 2 snowmobiles and the pickup used to haul it.   None of it was every returned and they didn't get to keep the deer either.   All the items became the property of the state and I believe were eventually auctioned off when they dispose of confiscated property.

 

An already big problem is going to be a bigger problem if it is deemed someone shouldn't have guns, but then puts them in a situation where they will have access to them.   

 

Something is very fishy about this situation from a legal point of view, I think.   

[bandito]

15 hours ago, LawrenceN said:

Sure you can. Prohibition (of alcohol) was done by constitutional amendment, and reversed after a decade of that failed social experiment.

There are still some dry states in the U.S of A.

After taking a flight from New York to New Orleans and when flying over a dry state the bar onboard would be closed and reopened after leaving that states air space.

Some states are total dry on Sundays while the bars are open but don't serve alcohol drinks.

 

[smotherb]

18 hours ago, Odysseus123 said:

I wonder if anyone mistook him for a "well regulated militia"?

The US Supreme Court decided the second amendment right was individual and citizens did not have to be part of a militia to have the right to keep and bear arms

[smotherb]

17 hours ago, balo said:

Good thing about Thailand. You can sit inside a coffee shop or restaurant without looking over your shoulder and being shot by a random gunman. 

 

"At 7.48 deaths per 100,000 people in 2013, the country [Thailand] sees more than twice the fatalities from shootings per capita than the United States."

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/thailand-has-highest-reported-rate-of-gun-related-deaths-in-asia-8171308

 

[Odysseus123]

4 minutes ago, smotherb said:

"At 7.48 deaths per 100,000 people in 2013, the country [Thailand] sees more than twice the fatalities from shootings per capita than the United States."

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/thailand-has-highest-reported-rate-of-gun-related-deaths-in-asia-8171308

 

I wouldn't gainsay you on that one.

[smotherb]

16 hours ago, Credo said:

Thanks for that link.   It's a start, but I wonder if any of our legal-eagles know how this quasi-confiscation of weapons came about.   It seems very odd that the guns would be taken (legally) and then given to someone (his father).   He is an adult.   If you get caught with drugs, they don't return them to a family member, that's for sure.   

 

I know of a group of 4 guys who went deer hunting using snowmobiles.   They hauled their two snowmobiles in a pickup and they chased down a deer and shot it.   Everything used in the poaching incident was confiscated -- the 4 guns, the 2 snowmobiles and the pickup used to haul it.   None of it was every returned and they didn't get to keep the deer either.   All the items became the property of the state and I believe were eventually auctioned off when they dispose of confiscated property.

 

An already big problem is going to be a bigger problem if it is deemed someone shouldn't have guns, but then puts them in a situation where they will have access to them.   

 

Something is very fishy about this situation from a legal point of view, I think.   

I don't know the specifics, as you say, the article does not cover it; so this is just speculation.  However, in the US when a gun used in a police incident, the police take the gun as evidence; then, when the investigation is closed, if the owner of the guns was released/innocent, they get the guns back. In this case the perp was arrested for not leaving the White House grounds and the article says, " . . . the FBI to ask for Illinois authorities in Tazewell County to revoke Reinking's firearm license and to seize his four guns . . ." Illinois has a license to conceal carry and a FOID--Firearms Owner ID card. Not sure which license the perp had, but if it was just the FOID, he may have gotten back his guns because he left Illinois and the police may have given them to his father, who then returned them to him.

[smotherb]

4 hours ago, bandito said:

There are still some dry states in the U.S of A.

After taking a flight from New York to New Orleans and when flying over a dry state the bar onboard would be closed and reopened after leaving that states air space.

Some states are total dry on Sundays while the bars are open but don't serve alcohol drinks.

 

That has nothing to do with amending the Constitution. The reason alcohol is legal in some states at some times and illegal in others at other times is because of our Federal System which gives authority to the States, and the States often give authority to the counties, to decide some matters such as alcohol usage. The 18th amendment, the Constitutional ban on manufacture, sale and distribution of alcohol from 1920 to 1933, was a nationwide ban. Consequently, to repeal the ban a new constitutional amendment, the 21st amendment, was proposed and ratified to repeal the 18th amendment.

[Opl]

https://www.politicususa.com/2018/04/23/the-waffle-house-shooter-didnt-lose-his-gun-license-even-after-he-was-arrested-on-the-wh.html

[sukhumvitneon]

18 hours ago, Credo said:

Thanks for that link.   It's a start, but I wonder if any of our legal-eagles know how this quasi-confiscation of weapons came about.   It seems very odd that the guns would be taken (legally) and then given to someone (his father).   He is an adult.   If you get caught with drugs, they don't return them to a family member, that's for sure.   

 

You have a constitutional right to possess firearms.  You don't have one to possess drugs that are proscribed as contraband.

 

There are also states that have laws that provide for confiscation of unlawfully possessed firearms after a conviction, such as South Carolina.

[balo]

3 hours ago, smotherb said:

At 7.48 deaths per 100,000 people in 2013, the country [Thailand] sees more than twice the fatalities from shootings per capita than the United States."

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/thailand-has-highest-reported-rate-of-gun-related-deaths-in-asia-8171308

 

That was not my point , try to find any stories from Thai media that involves School massacres with dozen of fatalities, people getting shot randomly at public places,  restaurants etc. 

Now compare what you find with  news stories from the US .  No comparison , the US are in another league.  

 

I am aware of Thais getting killed on a weekly basis, but that is mostly family/friend fights or gangs .  

 

Edited April 24, 2018 by balo

[smotherb]

3 hours ago, balo said:

 

That was not my point , try to find any stories from Thai media that involves School massacres with dozen of fatalities, people getting shot randomly at public places,  restaurants etc. 

Now compare what you find with  news stories from the US .  No comparison , the US are in another league.  

 

I am aware of Thais getting killed on a weekly basis, but that is mostly family/friend fights or gangs .  

 

Well, sorry, I do not agree with your exacting limitations. I am sure it would not make any difference to me if I was killed by friends/family/gangs or just at random siting in a restaurant. I'd still be dead, wouldn't I?

[smotherb]

6 hours ago, smotherb said:

I don't know the specifics, as you say, the article does not cover it; so this is just speculation.  However, in the US when a gun used in a police incident, the police take the gun as evidence; then, when the investigation is closed, if the owner of the guns was released/innocent, they get the guns back. In this case the perp was arrested for not leaving the White House grounds and the article says, " . . . the FBI to ask for Illinois authorities in Tazewell County to revoke Reinking's firearm license and to seize his four guns . . ." Illinois has a license to conceal carry and a FOID--Firearms Owner ID card. Not sure which license the perp had, but if it was just the FOID, he may have gotten back his guns because he left Illinois and the police may have given them to his father, who then returned them to him.

Update: I have looked at some other news sources and found this:

 

According to police, Reinking was once arrested by the Secret Service for trespassing near the White House. He was charged with unlawful entry, an arrest report states, but had his charges dismissed after completing community service.

The FBI interviewed Reinking shortly after he completed the program and seized his guns. Authorities in Tazewell County, Illinois, later returned the seized weapons to Reinking's father, who gave them back to his son, police said. One of those guns was the same AR-15-style rifle used in Sunday's attack.

https://edition.cnn.com/us/live-news/waffle-house-shooting-manhunt/

In August, state and local authorities seized his guns and gave them to his father, Jeffrey Reinking, who agreed to keep the firearms secure and away from Travis, officials said. Since Sunday’s shooting, the father has told police that he eventually gave the guns back to his son . . . Federal officials said Monday that the transfer was probably illegal and that the older Rein­king might be charged . . . After an investigation by the FBI office in Springfield, Ill., the Tazewell County Sheriff’s Office said Monday, it was asked by the Illinois State Police to take away Reinking’s firearm owners identification (FOID) card, which he needed to legally possess guns or ammunition in Illinois. When a person’s FOID card is revoked, they have to hand it over to authorities and fill out paperwork confirming that their guns have been transferred to someone who has a valid card, the sheriff’s office said. Reinking signed his four guns over to his father on Aug. 24, 2017, according to state records.Matthew E. Espenshade, assistant special agent in charge of the FBI’s Memphis division, said Monday that “every federal resource was brought to bear” in Reinking’s case after his arrest at the White House and the FBI assessment, pointing specifically to the attempts to keep him from possessing firearms.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2018/04/23/waffle-house-shooting-travis-reinking-manhunt-continues-nashville-police-say/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a38320773338

[Restinpeace]

On 4/23/2018 at 6:33 AM, saakura said:

Just the normal in USA. Next will come the candle light vigil + flowers, usual noises from the anti & pro gun lobby, then status quo till the next mass shooting.

What's normal in Europe is allowing even more lenient policies for mass refugees. Candle light vigil + flowers and the usual noises from the EU. Then the status quo until the next mass truck murder or bombing.                            

[gk10002000]

They better damn well prosecute the Dad to the full extent of the law.  Probably hard to convict the Dad on conspiracy to commit murder, but might be worth a try.

[Credo]

34 minutes ago, gk10002000 said:

They better damn well prosecute the Dad to the full extent of the law.  Probably hard to convict the Dad on conspiracy to commit murder, but might be worth a try.

I'd like to know what law or what agency has the right to confiscate property and then give it to someone else who isn't the rightful owner.   

 

Something very fishy with the whole scenario.

 

[Credo]

19 hours ago, sukhumvitneon said:

You have a constitutional right to possess firearms.  You don't have one to possess drugs that are proscribed as contraband.

 

There are also states that have laws that provide for confiscation of unlawfully possessed firearms after a conviction, such as South Carolina.

So, let's see....the gov't can just willy-nilly take away someone's guns and give them to someone else?   I have never, ever heard of this happening.   When items are confiscated, even a vehicle, it doesn't go to someone other than the lawful owner.