gun show loophole rant

Quote: rxwine

The govenrmnet sent him a letter after getting information about him from an unknown source.

Sounds like a disgruntled ex-wife to me.

It's much worse than that.

I was waiting to reply, trying to get my ducks in a row as I hate just throwing out unsubstantiated hearsay. But here's the deal...

I heard quite a while ago that Cuomo had some sort of 7 man task force, his own personal Schutzstaffel, that, in league with the DHS and with sanction and encouragement from Biden, were to "test the waters", so to speak, of large scale confiscation. These 7 men, all of whom were from the NYSP (because all Local and County boys told Cuomo to piss off) were to subpoena medical records from psychiatrists and other mental health facilities in spite of HIPAA and use the arbitrary rules in NYSAFE to begin confiscations at whim.

Now, c'mon. You wanna talk far-right fear mongering and survivalist paranoia, well hell, this is the poster child for it, isn't it?

Isn't it?

But then that one guy who got nicked for the Xanex got an attorney, and they got pissed. They started to pressure. And things started happening.

As I already stated, the NYSP relented, saying "oops!". Government officials involved gave them a sideways glance and said "Ooops? That was no oops" And before long it was looking like, hey, maybe there is something rotten in Denmark.

Word came in from Doug Hagmann, some DHS insider, saying that this 7 man squad existed. Full disclosure, Hagmann seems some sort of crack pot, and I'll say that up front and allow you to make your own judgement. His comments were bizarre enough that I almost wrote the whole thing off as conspiracy garbage.

But then another DHS insider came forward. Then another.

As it stands now, Tresmond, who is representing the man who had his gear confiscated, is completely confident and states he has proof that this 7 man clandestine squad of Constitution rapers actually exists and does so at the behest of Cuomo, Biden, the DHS, the Dept of Criminal Justice Services, and the NYSP.

Now, is this just a lawyer being a dunderhead? Or, since the NYSP thing actually happened, and they actually relented (why on earth would they relent if they were on the up-and-up?), do the accusations seem plausible? I, for one, think every bit is true, and I'm surely not one to jump to conclusions or claim the sky is falling.

You know, I re-read this whole thread, all the way back to well before Sandy Hook even happened. Plain as day, the antis were railing how foolish and paranoid we gunners were, claiming "confiscation was absurd" and "we were paranoid". And you know what?

I'm not even going to say "told you so". I don't even give a rip about my guns anymore. What's going down in NYS right this second is bleeding terrifying. Several units of State and Federal government are stomping on HIPAA, the 2nd, and the 4th, through use of the NYSP and therefore under the threat of arms and imprisonment, and are doing so with no oversight or input from The People.

Don't argue with me. Don't call me a paranoid crackpot. Don't mock me and tell me to go get my tinfoil hat. Do some research yourself. Come to your own conclusion. If you do your due diligence and still want to call me names, by all means, do so. I won't even get mad; even better, I'll completely admit I was wrong. But, if even an inkling of your conscience feels in the least bit that what I'm telling you is true, FIGHT. Fight this with all your might. Because if what I've just described is true, our "leaders" must be held accountable. They must pay, and they must be made an example of. If this is found true and we don't fight, then we deserve to lose our country and suffer all the ills it will bring us and our children.

Here's a situation where having a gun didn't help. On an unrelated note, wouldn't you think the police in Texas (or anywhere for that matter) would exercise at least a little restraint before executing in situ, people that they think are robbing houses? The policemen involved in this execution might have to give up ten vacation days as a result!

It's funny how 2nd Amendment supporters are always portrayed as advocating violence, yet it's the people on the other end of the spectrum who like to make death threats when they don't get their way:

Twitter explodes with George Zimmerman death threats

Quote: Beethoven9th

It's funny how 2nd Amendment supporters are always portrayed as advocating violence, yet it's the people on the other end of the spectrum who like to make death threats when they don't get their way:

Twitter explodes with George Zimmerman death threats

The Washington Times offers four un-credited and un-linked examples from random Tweets. That's okay. Although the Washington Times has a habit of making things up, in this case it seems reasonable to assume that they were able to find four examples of death threats against George Zimmerman (real or made-up) from some no-bodies who should be condemned for suggesting such revolting things. But I noticed also that the Washington Times wasn't able to find any examples of people on Internet radio programs that would advocate shooting George Zimmerman. By the lack of outrage, I can only assume that conservatives are okay with threatening to shoot Hillary Clinton. I haven't heard any outrage among the conservatives here about this:

Quote: s2dbaker

The Washington Times offers four un-credited and un-linked examples from random Tweets.

You still haven't figured out that old google thing, huh? :)

Death threats against George Zimmerman, random white people explode during trial

Quote: Beethoven9th

You still haven't figured out that old google thing, huh? :)

Death threats against George Zimmerman, random white people explode during trial

I'm pretty good at the googles. I used it to find this which you support since you haven't condemned it.

Quote: s2dbaker

I used it to find this which you support since you haven't condemned it.

I've never condemned Godzilla either. Doesn't mean I support him though.

Quote: s2dbaker

I'm pretty good at the googles.

Not really. You didn't use it to prove that this statement is false:

"The Washington Times offers four un-credited and un-linked examples from random Tweets."

Quote: Beethoven9th

You didn't use it to prove that this statement is false:

"The Washington Times offers four un-credited and un-linked examples from random Tweets."

So the Washington Times didn't offer four examples? Did I count wrong? The Washington Times article that you linked to offered what seemed like four examples. Why would I use the googles to prove a statement false when I could just click your link and go to the article? You're not very good at this reading stuff are you?

Quote: s2dbaker

So the Washington Times didn't offer four examples? Did I count wrong?

Looks like you forgot what you said later on:

"Although the Washington Times has a habit of making things up..."


Before implying that the Twitter story was false, you should take 5 seconds & do a quick google search.

Quote: Beethoven9th

Looks like you forgot what you said later on:

"Although the Washington Times has a habit of making things up..."


Before implying that the Twitter story was false, you should take 5 seconds & do a quick google search.

Looks like you have an ellipsis problem because right after your selective edit, I said:

"..in this case it seems reasonable to assume that they were able to find four examples of death threats against George Zimmerman (real or made-up) from some no-bodies"

See what I did there? I gave the Washington Times the benefit of the doubt. I'm still waiting for that condemnation of this guy:

As a result of this thread the nations GDP had to be revised down.....

Quote: s2dbaker

"..in this case it seems reasonable to assume that they were able to find four examples of death threats against George Zimmerman (real or made-up) from some no-bodies"

See what I did there? I gave the Washington Times the benefit of the doubt.

Ah, nice move. I've gotta remember to post sarcastic statements, so later on I will have the option of pretending that they weren't sarcastic at all. ;)

Quote: s2dbaker

I'm still waiting for that condemnation of this guy:

OK, after you condemn this guy (at 0:19):

Quote: Beethoven9th

OK, after you condemn this guy (at 0:19):

My audio card is acting up so I'll just assume that Bill Maher threatened to murder a public official or shoot her in the vagina and I definitely condemn such irresponsible idiocy.

Quote: s2dbaker

My audio card is acting up so I'll just assume that Bill Maher threatened to murder a public official or shoot her in the vagina and I definitely condemn such irresponsible idiocy.

Mine too. Therefore, I cannot comment on that guy (who nobody has even heard of) who supposedly said something bad about Hillary. ;)

Buy a gun for self defense they said.
It'll be safer than not having a gun they said.

Quote: TribLive

Kylie Marie Sage of Fayette County recognized the potential danger of firearms firsthand after being an eyewitness to a mass shooting inside a Colorado bar almost four years ago.

But that personal awareness doesn't make news of Sage's accidental shooting death early Sunday any easier to comprehend for family and friends.

Two Colorado Democrats Ousted in Recall Vote Over Gun Law

YES!!!

Quote: Beethoven9th

Two Colorado Democrats Ousted in Recall Vote Over Gun Law

YES!!!

+1

Now if only the GOP would not have to be dragged kicking and screaming to stand up for liberty like they were here they may win some more.

I can't believe I'm reduced to,

"Closing loopholes and requiring background checks isn't going to keep guns out of the criminally insane.".

I just inherited 2 guns. My dad's service pistol and a few rifles.

Still locked and in storage...

Two law abiding citizens with concealed carry permits stood their ground. They both died.

Remember when the liberals complained that the Sarah Palin "target map" caused the Giffords shooting?

Did Obama cause today's Capitol shooting?

Quote: AZDuffman

Remember when the liberals complained that the Sarah Palin "target map" caused the Giffords shooting?

Did Obama cause today's Capitol shooting?

This administration is such an embarrassment. *facepalm*

But they're safe as long as his supporters get their Obama-phones and other goodies...

Quote: AZDuffman

Remember when the liberals complained that the Sarah Palin "target map" caused the Giffords shooting?

Did Obama cause today's Capitol shooting?

Probably not, considering the the lady who was executed in situ by the Capitol police was unarmed.

Quote: s2dbaker

Probably not, considering the the lady who was executed in situ by the Capitol police was unarmed.

You mean besides the vehicle she was using in a reckless manner that could have potentially killed many people.

Quote: VCUSkyhawk

You mean besides the vehicle she was using in a reckless manner that could have potentially killed many people.

Unless Obama said something about running over people then I'm fairly certain that the shooting wasn't caused by Obama's rhetoric.

I'm sick of all the sanctimonious (and hypocritical) Hollywood liberals out there who want to take away our guns. Whoever made this video is absolutely brilliant and should receive an award for exposing these frauds for who they really are.


(Remember, these are the same people who want to blame shootings on the so-called "violent" rhetoric of the Tea Party, yet they fail to consider their own damn movies!)

Quote: Beethoven9th

I'm sick of all the sanctimonious (and hypocritical) Hollywood liberals out there who want to take away our guns.

Then you should boycott them. Eschew them from your existence. As a matter of fact, I forbid you from viewing or listening to any content that was created by a Hollywood liberal. We're cutting you off. You may watch or listen to media created by Hollywood liberals only when you become a liberal gun grabber. Enjoy your Kirk Cameron godumentaries.

It's funny, I know you said that in jest, but that's actually what I do. I rarely go to the movies or watch any TV these days.

...and Kirk Cameron is the man!! ;)

I don't have a dog in this fight but I do find it kind of ironic that most of the celebrities that scream the loudest about gun control have some of the largest details of armed bodyguards. I saw Jim Carrey one time at Universal Studios while he was doing something for Ace Ventura 2 and he had at least 3 guys with Uzis.

Quote: Perdition

Quote: Beethoven9th

I don't have a dog in this fight but I do find it kind of ironic that most of the celebrities that scream the loudest about gun control have some of the largest details of armed bodyguards. I saw Jim Carrey one time at Universal Studios while he was doing something for Ace Ventura 2 and he had at least 3 guys with Uzis.

Yeah, Beyonce is a perfect example. I love how she acts all choked up at 2:18, yet she sure doesn't mind being in movies with guns.

You don't hear the shot because there is no sound, but the robber fires a shot pass the head of this clerk. You can see the muzzle flash.

I'm sure everyone has seen/heard about that POS group of bikers who almost beat a guy to death in New York.

Gun control advocates always ask, "Why in the world would anyone ever need an AR-15??? Just call the police instead."

Well, this is why! There were 30+ bikers who chased this guy, and guess what?? There was also an UNDERCOVER COP present who did absolutely NOTHING to stop the beatdown! So much for "Just call the police". OTOH, if you're ever swarmed by a gang of hooligans like these guys, an AR-15 will take care of them just fine.

Let's see. SUV hits biker, does nothing. SUV takes off, running over a bunch of bikes in the process. End result is that the driver in the car sufffered from some stitches. What would a gun have done? The SUV driver didn't handle this properly, and likely, if he owned an AR-15, he probably would have mishandled that too and there would be dead bikers. By the way he handled his SUV with a family in it, he was afraid of the bikers, but you don't run when you are involved in an accident, and that's what he did.

Obviously life is not sacred to you. You consider minor incidents like this to be a warrant to pull out a gun and kill someone, when clearly, the driver at the SUV was originally responsible for the initial altercation.

boymimbo,

I'm very disappointed with you on this one. You have ALWAYS done your homework in every discussion in which I've seen you participate, so I'm a bit surprised that you failed to do your homework here.

Did you even watch the YouTube clip? Have you been keeping up with this story at all? Because almost everything you've said about this case is false. NYPD doesn't even agree with you. Please go back and watch the Good Morning America clip in my previous post.

After that, read this:
"Deleted Videos Show Asshat Bikers Before Range Rover Attack"

And this:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57605654-504083/nyc-motorcycle-attack-update-one-suspect-in-road-rage-incident-involving-suv-released-another-due-in-court-report-says
(Pay close attention to this line: "Police said Cruz intentionally brake-checked the SUV, reports CBS New York." Then go back and watch the GMA video at 0:33 as proof of this.)

LOL, Beethoven.

I watched the clip. I read the stories. A gun still wouldn't have helped in this case and may have resulted in death. Certainly the driver escalated the incident when he pulled away and ran over the biker which caused the chase to escalate and continue.

Quote: rxwine

You don't hear the shot because there is no sound, but the robber fires a shot pass the head of this clerk. You can see the muzzle flash.

Guess that guy never heard the saying don't bring a knife to a gunfight. Good for him. I guess after someone shoots at you, you really have nothing to lose anyways.

Quote: boymimbo

LOL, Beethoven.

I watched the clip. I read the stories. A gun still wouldn't have helped in this case and may have resulted in death. Certainly the driver escalated the incident when he pulled away and ran over the biker which caused the chase to escalate and continue.

That's hindsight. The guy with his wife and kid felt that the risk of hanging around and 'chatting' with the friendly group of motorcyclists who just forced him to stop outweighed the risk of running for his life! Remember, he was repeatedly calling the police while being chased down by the thugs. Having seen the videos, I can't see how anyone can blame the SUV driver.

Quote: Beethoven9th

Well, this is why! There were 30+ bikers who chased this guy, and guess what?? There was also an UNDERCOVER COP present who did absolutely NOTHING to stop the beatdown! So much for "Just call the police". OTOH, if you're ever swarmed by a gang of hooligans like these guys, an AR-15 will take care of them just fine.

The undercover cop is on video smashing the rear window. That's perhaps less about cops than bad cops.

Quote: boymimbo

... the driver at the SUV was originally responsible for the initial altercation.

Quote: SOOPOO

... I can't see how anyone can blame the SUV driver.

*Disclaimer* - I am a former Squid.

I saw this blank slate. I haven’t watched the news, or heard the spin, or anything of the sort. My only exposure to this, besides the few comments here, was the full video without commentary or sound.

The bikers were idiots, sure. As wild as I was, I didn’t even ride like that. Against traffic, in a big wad, being a purposeful menace… not my style. I saw handfuls of those guys who deserved being hassled by 5-0. That goes without saying.

The initial contact was the result of both parties. The Squids shouldn’t have swarmed traffic in the manner they did. The Cager shouldn’t have remained inside the swarm. It was not my habit to get as close to random cars as possible, nor is it my current habit to remain in a sketchy situation behind the wheel, especially when involving bikes.

So the Cager hits a Squid. Not even “hit”, just kind of bumped him, knocked him down. Again, it is not my habit to panic and assume the other Squids are automatically going to kill me. How about, I dunno, seeing if dude was OK? Even if the other Squids were cussing me out…who cares?

At this point, only traffic offenses have been committed, maybe Assault on part of the Squids depending on what was said. The instant the Cager ran down a pack of bikers, that turned into Assault with a Deadly Weapon, possibly even Attempted Murder. I’m non-confrontational by design, but if I can put myself into their shoes and imagine my Pops, my cousin, or any one of my biker brothers being run down by some skittish Cager, I likewise would’ve followed him to the ends of the Earth and ripped him out of his car when he stopped.

Beat the guy? Probably not required, but dunno how I’d be able to resist.

Quote: boymimbo

I watched the clip. I read the stories.

You know, we've had many lively & spirited debates in this forum, and this is the first time I've ever said this to you: I don't believe you. (RE: above) I'll say it again, please watch the video:




At 0:52: "Then, a critical moment not caught on camera. Police say at least one of the bikers slashed the SUV's tires. That's when things get really ugly."

Maybe you're a tough guy who can fight off 30+ bikers (without a gun!), but the rest of us aren't. I don't know anyone who would stick around after some dumbass bikers slashed their tires.

Quote: Face

The instant the Cager ran down a pack of bikers, that turned into Assault with a Deadly Weapon, possibly even Attempted Murder.

See above.

Also, at 0:37 of the video, it says that one of the bikers brake checked the SUV.

Quote: SOOPOO

Having seen the videos, I can't see how anyone can blame the SUV driver.

+30

I think the issue may be this:

When did the SUV hit the bike rider to "start" the problem?

Initially I was under the assumption the guy who brake checked and eventually stopped the SUV on the highway had done so because the SUV had already hit a biker.

I now do not think that was the case. When the bikers say they were just protecting there own, I think that may be a lie.

If the first physical contact between the SUV and a biker happened on the video when the biker stopped the SUV on the highway, then the SUV was 100% in the right to run that shithead over. If the SUV had previously hit a biker and did not stop because he was worried about what the gang would do to him, then the driver of the SUV is to be held to some level of responsibility for the rest of the events that transpired.

Like a lawyer has told me a few times, the law is based on intent, and the actions of a person are secondary to the intent.

If the intent of the SUV driver was to get away from a pack of bangers who had stopped him dead in his tracks on the highway, then he did nothing wrong, but if his intent was to avoid injury after causing injury to a biker, then he needs to be held to some level of responsibility based on the outcome of not only his, but the gangs actions.

As for gun use...

Assume the SUV driver's (me in this example) first physical contact with a biker came when showed in the video, after the shithead stopped him cold on the highway.

I would have had my gun in my lap with one in the barrel ready to go the second I was stopped on the freeway. Assuming I took the same course of action as the driver of the SUV, I would have killed the first biker who opened my door before I drove off, the second time the gang stopped me on the highway.

I would have then continued on the freeway and continued to shoot anyone who continued to follow me until one of the following happened:

1. They stopped chasing me
2. The police showed up
3. I ran out of ammo
4. I was dead

If the reason I stopped shooting was due to reason #3, I would have tried to run over every single one of those cumdumpsters until reason #1, #2, or #4 stopped me.

Who says hockey can not cause brain damage ?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1064504/index.htm

Quote: Beethoven9th

Also, at 0:37 of the video, it says that one of the bikers brake checked the SUV.

Forget the video of some middle aged newscasters full of sensationalism. Have you ridden a bike before? If that is a brake check, I am the King of Prussia.

That was a high gear throttle roll off. Look at the brake light. If you can't see it, look at the Squid's posture. One armed, looking backwards. Does he pitch forward? No. And if he "brake checked", he certainly would've pitched forward and the bike would've veered to the right due to him pushing on just the right handle bar.

I'll say it again - just about every one of those Squids were idiots. None of them deserved to be hit, and damn sure not run over.

As I said in the DC thread on DT, once you use a car as a deadly weapon, it is a deadly weapon. Unless you think it was OK to shoot the men he ran over, it is not OK for him to run them over.

Quote: Buzzard

Who says hockey can not cause brain damage ?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1064504/index.htm

Yeah, I am brain damaged. I miss the connection to the thread, though (probably on account of the brain damage lol)

Care to explain?

Two points about the SUV/biker.

The bikers are all cohesive, as a group with a common point of interest tend to be even if many didn't even know each other, but crowds, especially disorganized can have a mob reaction. Most of them probably didn't know exactly what happened, or whose fault it was they just picked the angry mob reaction side, or possibly the encouragement of a couple douchebags who encouraged the reaction.

Maybe the SUV driver would have been more resigned to sit still if he was alone even under abuse, but people may sacrifice a lot more to insure their family is safe than they would for themselves.

Do you think there is an instinctive reaction (trapped animal) that comes from the primitive part of your brain when you feel surrounded and blocked in like a prey caught by wolves or lions. I think there might be.

The situation was dynamite that just needed the fuse lit. And it was lit.

Quote: Face

Forget the video of some middle aged newscasters full of sensationalism.

Face, point well taken. Anyone who has read my posts in the political threads knows how skeptical I am of the media. But...
______________________________

To all: Why does everyone here continue to ignore 0:52 of the video? I'll repeat what it says (and this is not some idiot newscaster's speculation): "Then, a critical moment not caught on camera. Police say at least one of the bikers slashed the SUV's tires."

I'm sorry, but if I'm in a car with my wife & 2-year-old child...and I'm surrounded by 30-50 bikers...and somebody slashes my tires.....I ain't gonna stick around to exchange pleasantries. I don't think anyone in this thread would either, regardless of what they say.

In fact, does anyone remember that 80's arcade game Spy Hunter, where you're on the freeway trying to run people off the road? That's exactly what I would have done to those punk bikers. Or, if I had an AR-15, I would have gunned down each one (since I can't fight off 30-50 guys with my bare hands like boymimbo).

Quote: rxwine

...but people may sacrifice a lot more to insure their family is safe than they would for themselves.

+1

The bikers were looking for trouble and found it. The incident makes a very good argument for high capacity magazines.

Quote: Beethoven9th

To all: Why does everyone here continue to ignore 0:52 of the video? I'll repeat what it says (and this is not some idiot newscaster's speculation): "Then, a critical moment not caught on camera. Police say at least one of the bikers slashed the SUV's tires."

Because questions.

How do they know it was "slashed"? Knife on the scene? Forensic analysis? If the tire was down, could it not have come from running over 3 or more large, 350lb metallic objects?

"3 mile long high-speed chase". Involving a 5,000lb+ SUV. On a flat tire. No smoke. No sparks. No tire disintegration. Pretty sure Range Rovers don't come with run-flats.

Questioning police (mis)conduct is fair game—I do so all the time—but their conclusions can't be ignored. For example, it speaks volumes that literally NOBODY (not even the bikers) have disputed the sequence of events.

Here's another article: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/03/bikers-suv-chase-videotape-new-york-motorcyclists/2915111

Key passage: "The clash began after Lien apparently clipped one of the 20 or 30 bikers who had pulled in front of the vehicle. As some of the bikers converged on the SUV and began beating the doors and slashing the tires, Lien hit the accelerator and sped off, striking several bikers as he pulled away."

Now I'm just as skeptical of the news media as anyone else, but there have been numerous reports (by a number of different agencies) saying that this is what happened. If this turns out to be a complete fabrication, I'll be the first one to ingest a good helping of crow, but I doubt it.

Here's yet another article: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57606470/new-video-of-nyc-motorcycle-road-rage-attack-shows-men-kicking-suv-driver

Key passage: "What happened next is not in dispute. First there was a collision, and then a confrontation. Suddenly, the black Range Rover peels off, hitting some of the riders. A chase ensues, until the SUV -- now with its tires slashed -- gets stuck in traffic."

Unless this is all one big lie, I don't see anything that the SUV driver did that anyone else would NOT have done under the same circumstances. Also, on a side note, after reading a boatload of articles on this tragedy, I was surprised that both liberals and conservatives actually appear to be in agreement on this case (at least on the sites I visited), in taking the side of the driver. Not that this means anything, of course, but it was a curious observation.

Quote: Maverick17

I would have had my gun in my lap with one in the barrel ready to go the second I was stopped on the freeway. Assuming I took the same course of action as the driver of the SUV, I would have killed the first biker who opened my door before I drove off, the second time the gang stopped me on the highway.

I would have then continued on the freeway and continued to shoot anyone who continued to follow me until one of the following happened:

1. They stopped chasing me
2. The police showed up
3. I ran out of ammo
4. I was dead

If the reason I stopped shooting was due to reason #3, I would have tried to run over every single one of those cumdumpsters until reason #1, #2, or #4 stopped me

+1

Another member thinks it's good that the SUV driver didn't have a gun because "he probably would have mishandled that too". *facepalm*

Fewer people died in New York during this whole biker wilding incident that had no guns than in this cabin in Oregon which featured a disgruntled 14 year old and lots of guns. Both may be made into movies but I think the one in Oregon will have "ch-ch-ch-ha-ha-ha" as its soundtrack.

Just in case you think that a gun incident involving a 14 year old was just a fluke last week, here's another one that happened in Illinois involving two more 14 year olds. I'm playing 14 in Keno next chance I get. Guns are totally safe!

Maybe if you pulled a gun and didn't shoot anyone right off it might go better. Some of the bikers were angry. Were any of them armed?

Quote:

Two Michigan drivers shot and killed each other Wednesday night after a road rage incident took a fatal turn in a drive-in car wash parking lot, police said.

Robert Taylor, 56, and James Pullum, 43, were driving on a highway in Ionia, Mich., when Taylor began to closely follow Pullum, according to the Ionia Public Safety Department, based on witness reports.

The two drivers eventually pulled into the parking lot of Wonder Wand Car Wash, at the intersection of M-66 highway and Steele Street. where they got out of their vehicles and fired shots at each other, police said. The two men exchanged a total of eight to nine shots, police said.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/09/two-michigan-drivers-shoot-and-kill-each-other-after-road-rage-incident/

Quote: s2dbaker

Fewer people died in New York during this whole biker wilding incident that had no guns than in this cabin in Oregon which featured a disgruntled 14 year old and lots of guns. Both may be made into movies but I think the one in Oregon will have "ch-ch-ch-ha-ha-ha" as its soundtrack.

Just in case you think that a gun incident involving a 14 year old was just a fluke last week, here's another one that happened in Illinois involving two more 14 year olds. I'm playing 14 in Keno next chance I get. Guns are totally safe!

The second article you linked to has to be wrong. Guns are virtually illegal in Aurora, Illinois due to the strict gun control laws in the community there, so something is afoot!!!!!!