Originally posted by Playa
View Post
As for weapons removed, I would assume that would be anything designed as or resembling an actual weapon that was in their possession or the proximity of their living quarters, whether firearms or knives. I assume it would not include steak knives, scissors, electrical cords and the like.
Let me ask you a question, though. In the case of the Sandy Hook shooter, his own mother feared him while a neighbor reported to the police that he was planning to kill his mother. The police investigated, but finding no evidence of a crime, did nothing. What if both his mother and the neighbor had been made aware this option that would have allowed the police to remove any weapons. What the heck would the issue be if they chose to pursue it, whether it prevented Sandy Hook, the mom's death or not?
You know what, forget that. If it is as easy as some think that the police can already take weapons away based on existing laws, why aren't they? The Florida shooting was in a liberal county with a liberal sheriff. This was low hanging fruit. So would have been the Orlando nightclub shooter if you recall. If this master plan is so well known as many suggest, how is it even conceivable that both the FBI and local law enforcement could ignore these golden opportunities to go ahead and remove guns? Maybe because it isn't as easy as you want to imagine and maybe there is nothing wrong with making it easier when it is justified.
Comment