# Louisiana Theater shooting



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

http://bigstory.ap.org/urn:publicid:ap.org:a622cf16ccfb4b9c82b2414be79f8589?nc=1437826897457



> In 2014, facing eviction from his Alabama home, John Russell Houser set out to make sure no one else could ever live in that house. He poured concrete down the drains and cemented the fuse box shut. He splattered paint and human waste all over the walls.
> 
> The new owners found Houser had it booby-trapped: the gas starter tube in the fireplace was twisted out and ignited, the logs removed. "He was hoping the house would catch on fire. That's what the investigators told me," said Norman Bone, 77, who had bought the house for his daughter.
> The man Bone once knew as a church-going neighbor had grown into someone better known by neighbors and colleagues as an angry provocateur. Police say his anger culminated Thursday night in a slaughter at The Grand 16 theater in Lafayette, Louisiana, leaving two women dead and nine other people hurt.
> ...


Obviously the guy was mentally ill. Quite a few of the shooters in past several years have been on medication or in treatment for mental illness or quit taking their meds. So how do we keep these people from acquiring guns and shooting large groups of people?


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Patchouli said:


> http://bigstory.ap.org/urn:publicid:ap.org:a622cf16ccfb4b9c82b2414be79f8589?nc=1437826897457
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously the guy was mentally ill. Quite a few of the shooters in past several years have been on medication or in treatment for mental illness or quit taking their meds. So how do we keep these people from acquiring guns and shooting large groups of people?


It's a good question. The domestic violence accusation alone should probably have kept him from legally obtaining a pistol.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> So how do we keep these people from acquiring guns and shooting large groups of people?


You don't since laws don't stop crimes from happening


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Unfortunately, we are just going to have to accept it, as a fact of modern life.

We have 300 million guns and 300 million people, many who are angry, senile, on pills or booze, depressed, anxious, racist, xenophobic. (maybe all of the above) Whatever doesnt matter.

They are certainly not all going to commit gun crimes, most won't, but some of them will and a lot of them will be horrendous, just like this one 

They seem to want to make a statement when they pull the trigger, so more carnage, seems to be better.

This will happen over and over again, in the future, IMO.


----------



## Ozarks Tom (May 27, 2011)

There was time not too distant that family members, police, and doctors could get someone like this committed to a hospital for long term treatment. Thanks to the ACLU and like organizations those hospitals are long gone.

The Sandy Hook shooter, as well as the Aurora shooter both would have been hospitalized under the old system. Makes me wonder how many lives could have been saved over the years if only we had the ability to keep these people from society.

Thanks to the liberal activists we're all in jeopardy.


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

The problem is NOT guns.
Our mental health system and our health insurance system is a disgrace.
Obamacare did nothing to help people who actually need insurance, and we've been going backwards since the 80's in mental health care. The very people who need it the most don't get help.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

Ozarks Tom said:


> *There was time not too distant that family members, police, and doctors could get someone like this committed to a hospital for long term treatment. *Thanks to the ACLU and like organizations those hospitals are long gone.
> 
> The Sandy Hook shooter, as well as the Aurora shooter both would have been hospitalized under the old system. Makes me wonder how many lives could have been saved over the years if only we had the ability to keep these people from society.
> 
> *Thanks to the liberal activists we're all in jeopardy*.


For sure!



> In 1967, Gov. Ronald Reagan signed the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS), which went into effect in 1969 and quickly became a national model. Among other things, it prohibited forced medication or extended hospital stays without a judicial hearing.
> 
> 
> A mental patient could be held for 72 hours only if he or she engaged in an act of serious violence or demonstrated a likelihood of suicide or an inability to provide their own food, shelter or clothing due to mental illness. But 72 hours was rarely enough time to stabilize someone with medication. Only in extreme cases could someone be held another two weeks for evaluation and treatment.
> ...


http://www.treatmentadvocacycenter....as-30-year-failure-to-confront-mental-illness


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> As a practical matter, involuntary commitment was no longer a plausible option.


The big change there was requiring a court hearing for extended stays.
It prevented people from being locked up long term based on one or two people's opinon


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Obviously the guy was mentally ill. Quite a few of the shooters in past several years have been on medication or in treatment for mental illness or quit taking their meds. So how do we keep these people from acquiring guns and shooting large groups of people?


The facts you don't because you can't. Criminals, sane and otherwise will always be find some way to kill. The best thing to do is have as many law abiding people possible armed to reduce the number of victims criminals can kill. You'll note that most (all?) mass shootings have happen in places where the victims have no chance of fighting back.

One other thing to think about the largest mass killing which did not involve the use of explosives, 87 people, was caused by fire (google Happy Land fire). The reports say that the reason he burned the place was because he couldn't get a firearm so in a sick twist of fate you could say preventing him from getting a firearm most likely cost more lives.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

Maybe there should be some examination of the legal drugs these people get prescribed and see if taking them - or not taking them - could contribute to it. Can we afford to have them put on these drugs and depend on them to continue to take them. Might they be less dangerous if they were never medicated? Just questions.

One thing some of these happenings point out is that gun laws are not going to fix the problem - 

Senile? - You've done quite preaching and started meddlin' - just joking. (My 74th is coming up - )


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

watcher said:


> The facts you don't because you can't. Criminals, sane and otherwise will always be find some way to kill. The best thing to do is have as many law abiding people possible armed to reduce the number of victims criminals can kill. You'll note that most (all?) mass shootings have happen in places where the victims have no chance of fighting back.
> 
> One other thing to think about the largest mass killing which did not involve the use of explosives, 87 people, was caused by fire (google Happy Land fire). The reports say that the reason he burned the place was because he couldn't get a firearm so in a sick twist of fate you could say preventing him from getting a firearm most likely cost more lives.


I was living in NYC when the Happyland fire happened, it was so awful.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

The odds of being killed by one of these crazies is extremely small. Ever stop to figure how many theaters were open in the US on that day? Just the odds of being in the same theater were extremely small. The truth is, you are at risk (at some level) of being killed in some manner each time you poke your nose out your door, or stay in your house for that matter. Government laws won't protect you or prevent you from being attacked by some crazy or radical person of some sort. The best you can do is try to stay aware of your surroundings and be prepared to defend yourself. Even that won't protect you if the guy sitting behind you in a theater suddenly stands up and starts shooting people in front of him. You most likely would be dead long before you could respond.


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

Unfortunately we are trying to solve a problem that can not be solved. We are a huge society. there will always be some broken cogs in the machine. Nothing can prevent it.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Apparently NICS failed. Somebody didn't do their job. Imagine that!

That's the real question: how come NICS passed his background check that enabled him to get the gun legally?

Oops!


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Txsteader said:


> Apparently NICS failed. Somebody didn't do their job. Imagine that!
> 
> That's the real question: how come NICS passed his background check that enabled him to get the gun legally?
> 
> Oops!


It's most likely that the data was never reported, and BO will use that as a justification to implement more restrictive requirements for both the reporting, and the length of time allowed to do the NICS checks.

He will also push for "universal" background checks for private gun sales.

Somewhere on this site is a thread where I predicted a couple of years ago that a rash of high profile shootings near the end of his term would be used to enact more restrictions


----------



## DryHeat (Nov 11, 2010)

The gun was purchased in 2006 (edit add: this was stated on a tv report just before I wrote the post, but certainly it sounds incorrect now) before he'd been involuntarily committed by his family in 2008. The state concealed carry permit was denied based on the warning flags, but domestic violence had only been alleged, not prosecuted and convicted. Perhaps "conservative" refusals to fund "liberal" programs of various sorts including mental hospitals have something to do with inability to keep deranged people confined and/or required to be medicated to be released from hospitals? (I'm aware the trend of closing mental wards and turning such ill people into the wandering homeless pretty much started in California in the 70s and partly supported by rather silly liberal-humanistic knee-jerk sorts of sentiments. Elsewhere, it looks pretty clear that lack of taxes funding the programs is more to blame.)

In the Giffords shooting in Arizona, in fact a local young man in the adjacent drug store had a (legally in AZ) handgun in his pocket and rushed outside drawing it when he heard the shooting. He simply pocketed it again when he found that survivors had jumped the perp as he was reloading after 30 seconds of emptying his initial 30+ Glock extended magazine rounds into the crowd, killing six. Come on, let's have at least a tiny bit of rationality from the NRA and its minions. There is zero, *zero* reason to allow more than 8-9 round magazines to be legal for handguns, or long guns either for that matter. Sure, Loughner as other such crazies have done, could have purchased several handguns and pulled them from pockets as the first one ran out of ammo, but why make it so freakin' easy for them to do that much damage with a first and only handgun? I submit that anyone who thinks they need 30+ rounds for personal defense in a handgun needs to rethink whether they are in fact themselves the decent and rational players if they want to shoot that many people, or have trained suitably if it'll take that many rounds to fend off one or two perps. We have around a dozen firearms in our household but plan on 5-6 round capacities being quite enough, thank you. But thanks to the NRA, its firearm and ammo manufacturing sponsors, and all you sheeple who've fallen in with their "NO legislative adjustments" line up and down federal to local legislative bodies, even something as simple as banning those insane high-capacity situations is a kiss of political death. 

Of course, that's beside the point in the most recent case since the LA lunatic did have limited firepower, thankfully. Certainly tighter enforcement of the permit system is needed. Again maybe funding for government (like taxing corporations and the 1% etc more heavily would help, eh?) would trickle-down to help some? Keep in mind though this fellow wasn't *convicted* of any violence and I sure don't want simple allegations of domestic abuse to be something that automatically permanently disarms everybody they're leveled at, nor *suspicions* of mental illness. There has to be the will and funding to carry through on prosecutions and enforcements in those cases, including involuntary medication. The problem is, again, the safeguards and due process has to be there too and that takes money for government, which, golly, sounds "liberal" doesn't it?

Oh, so 30+ rounds in a Glock can let you get to your AR-15 or AK-47 with *real* capacity plus range for fighting off Chinese invaders or gumment stooges like ATF or National Guard to preserve your freedoms after a conspiratorial collapse? To quote Neil Young, "Red means run, son, the numbers add up to nothin'"!


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

I take it you've never been up against a gang of thugs. They do run in packs.
Just because YOU think a person shouldn't have adequate ammo capacity, doesn't mean you get to pass a law to put their life at risk.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The big change there was requiring a court hearing for extended stays.
> It prevented people from being locked up long term based on one or two people's opinon


Very true. There were cases of kids wanting control of dad's cash, so they would say he needed put in a mental facility. It's really a fine line deciding who does and doesn't need confined for their own or other's safety. Mental professionals often disagree themselves.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> The gun was purchased in 2006 before he'd been involuntarily committed by his family in 2008.


The report I saw said the gun was bought in 2014
A TV report said "last year"

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/25/timeline-theater-gunman-john-russell-houser-life/



> February 2014 - Houser purchases gun used in Louisiana theater shooting at a pawn shop in Phenix City, Alabama.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> There is zero, *zero* reason to allow more than 8-9 round magazines to be legal for handguns, or long guns either for that matter.


Luckily you don't get to make that decision



> I submit that anyone who thinks they need 30+ rounds for personal defense in a handgun needs to rethink whether they are in fact themselves the decent and rational players if they want to shoot that many people, or have trained suitably if it'll take that many rounds to fend off one or two perps.


I submit you may be the irrational one here



> But thanks to the NRA, its firearm and ammo manufacturing sponsors, and *all you sheeple *who've fallen in with their "NO legislative adjustments" line up and down federal to local legislative bodies, even something as simple as banning *those insane high-capacity situations *is a kiss of political death.


Now I know you're the irrational one, and you have lost all credibility to me


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

I blame it all on the poor quality of movies these days encouraging an uneducated audience. (  )


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

It's getting scary out there. I had plans to take my 5 grand daughters to a movie and shopping for a girls day out before school starts back. I'm not comfortable now taking them to a show so we'll just be shopping and going out to eat. On one hand I don't like giving in to the crazies but I'm don't think betting my grand daughters life on it is worth it even with such slim odds.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

In the old days, the Soviets would never publicize an event like this.

Don't know if that kept down the copy cat crazies, or not, but it's a thought...


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

dixiegal62 said:


> It's getting scary out there. I had plans to take my 5 grand daughters to a movie and shopping for a girls day out before school starts back. I'm not comfortable now taking them to a show so we'll just be shopping and going out to eat. On one hand I don't like giving in to the crazies but I'm don't think betting my grand daughters life on it is worth it even with such slim odds.


I've only been to 3 or so movies in my life. Just never enjoyed going. However, if I wanted to go, these rare incidences wouldn't stop me. Someone could as easily shoot things up in a restaurant or mall. Can't let fear run your life.


----------



## dixiegal62 (Aug 18, 2007)

poppy said:


> I've only been to 3 or so movies in my life. Just never enjoyed going. However, if I wanted to go, these rare incidences wouldn't stop me. Someone could as easily shoot things up in a restaurant or mall. Can't let fear run your life.


True but dark theater loud noise make your odds worse. Personally there's nothing I want to take the grandkids to see bad enough that we can't wait and see when it's released on DVD. I'd prefer to pick the battles I'm willing to fight without my grandkids involved


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

I don't know what's going on here, but what's with the obviously fake photo job?


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

watcher said:


> The facts you don't because you can't. Criminals, sane and otherwise will always be find some way to kill. The best thing to do is have as many law abiding people possible armed to reduce the number of victims criminals can kill. You'll note that most (all?) mass shootings have happen in places where the victims have no chance of fighting back.
> 
> One other thing to think about the largest mass killing which did not involve the use of explosives, 87 people, was caused by fire (google Happy Land fire). The reports say that the reason he burned the place was because he couldn't get a firearm so in a sick twist of fate you could say preventing him from getting a firearm most likely cost more lives.


I don't remember hearing about that one. Sad story.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

farmrbrown said:


> I take it you've never been up against a gang of thugs. They do run in packs.
> Just because YOU think a person shouldn't have adequate ammo capacity, doesn't mean you get to pass a law to put their life at risk.


I haven't read any Rambo type stories ever involving someone being attacked by a gang of thugs and needing a massive magazine in order to fend them off. Sounds more like a movie plot than reality.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I haven't read any Rambo type stories ever involving *someone being attacked by a gang of thugs* and needing a massive magazine in order to fend them off. Sounds more like a movie plot than reality.


Have you heard of the Rodney King riots, and the Korean store owners whose businesses DIDN'T get burned down?


----------



## Nimrod (Jun 8, 2010)

This tragedy is just more evidence to back up the arguments that the gun crowd has been saying for years. The mass shootings have all taken place in "gun free" zones. Solution, no more gun free zones. Gun control laws don't work. A crazy will steal a gun if they can't buy one legally. In this case the background check didn't work. The only solution is to take away all the guns and that is impossible.

Gun free zones should be illegal. Just one armed citizen at any of the mass shootings may have lessened the body count. Crazies may be less likely to shoot a bunch of people in a public place if they think someone will be shooting back.

I would like to see all the media voluntarily censor themselves and not report any mass shooting. This probably won't happen because lurid stories sell papers. How about they just don't mention the shooter's name and not show a picture. This might dissuade those who do a copycat or expect they will get remembered forever.

We need to help the crazy people before they go completely nuts. Sorry ACLU but the rest of us have the right to be protected from the crazies and that right trumps their right to not be confined. The worst of them need to be locked up until they get better.

I don't buy the argument against large capacity magazines. Smaller magazines can be changed so quickly that bystanders don't have time to jump a shooter while they are changing magazines unless they are standing really close to them. It's unlikely that someone will be close to a shooter after they have fired off the first magazine. If 5 thugs break into your house you may need all 30 rounds in the magazine to repel them. Unless you are Annie Oakely and can shoot them in the head with one round, it will take multiple rounds to stop a determined bad guy.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

I am stumped on the obviously fake photo job. Looks like an official photo from a driver's license or some sort of ID to me. 

So far as how we address the mentally ill when it comes to forced psychiatric care I think maybe the pendulum swung too far on this one. There was a long period of time in our history when you could be carted off and locked for no real reason at all other than a family member wanted you out of the way. That was not good. Then in reaction to that we swung too far the other direction. 

I think we can all imagine a scenario where involuntary commitment could be abused. The case of an elderly parent was a good example. It can still happen to children and teens today. Unfortunately though for a lot of illnesses the only treatment is staying on your meds and the illness itself is constantly pushing people to go off them. Schizophrenia and bi-polar for example. And then we have meds that actually cause people to because suicidal or go on rampages like some of the depression meds. 

You guys are probably right that there is no real help for it. I don't know that everyone being armed is any better of an idea though. Having people caught in the crossfire between a gunman and an armed defender in a crowded dark theater would end in more casualties not less.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Patchouli said:


> I haven't read any Rambo type stories ever involving someone being attacked by a gang of thugs and needing a massive magazine in order to fend them off. Sounds more like a movie plot than reality.


Uh yeah.
I guess that concussion I got in Atlanta was harder than I thought, although it was the broken ribs that REALLT hurt.

At 10:1, I'd like a little equalizer on my side, thank you very much.

If you need more recent examples, tune in to the news tonight.
Watch some Youtube videos, do some googling.
Often when people say they've never seen or heard something, it's a matter of wanting to find it.........or not.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Maybe a tracking device would help.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Have you heard of the Rodney King riots, and the Korean store owners whose businesses DIDN'T get burned down?


I found lots of pictures of Korean store owners with hand guns and rifles. No monster magazines. They appear to have survived just fine. 

I do find it highly ironic that you guys start off with nothing you can do about the occasional mentally ill person with a gun and then move to an even less likely scenario of being a small business owner protecting yourself in a riot as a reasonable excuse for us to all need huge magazines for our guns.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Considering the fact that most of these shooters go in with a death wish (they either shoot themselves or hang out long enough for law enforcement to take them down) I don't think the knowledge that there might be someone who is armed wherever they are attacking will deter them. Might make them stealthier to get the maximum number of victims before they die but that's about it.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Yeah, those riots in several cities this year never happened, and aren't a likely scenario.

Since you may or may not be acquainted with the details of firearms, I'll be blunt.
It ain't that it's necessary, it's just easier and safer to empty a larger magazine and not be worried about having too many standing around when the smoke clears.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

MoonRiver said:


> Maybe a tracking device would help.



For the mentally ill?


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

farmrbrown said:


> Yeah, those riots in several cities this year never happened, and aren't a likely scenario.
> 
> Since you may or may not be acquainted with the details of firearms, I'll be blunt.
> It ain't that it's necessary, it's just easier and safer to empty a larger magazine and not be worried about having too many standing around when the smoke clears.


I was in the military and I own several guns so yes I am well acquainted with how they work. And that for the very well trained/experienced shooter swapping out a smaller clip isn't that hard. Most of these people aren't well trained or experienced though. The example from the Arizona shooting is a good one.


----------



## Harry Chickpea (Dec 19, 2008)

"I am stumped on the obviously fake photo job. Looks like an official photo from a driver's license or some sort of ID to me."

Yep, looks exactly like the photo from an Alabama driver's license blown up. The artifacting is pretty normal for taking a low quality scan and enlarging it.


As for fear of going to a theatre, I call BS. High ticket prices and customers on cellphones, now THAT is a reason not to go. Hey! I got an idea? How about if the crazies only shot people in theatres who were using their cellphones?!?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I found lots of pictures of Korean store owners with hand guns and rifles. No monster magazines. They appear to have survived just fine.
> 
> I do find it highly ironic that you guys *start off with nothing you can do* about the occasional mentally ill person with a gun and then *move to an even less likely scenario* of being a small business owner protecting yourself in a riot as a reasonable excuse for us to all need huge magazines for our guns.


Those statements aren't mutually exclusive.

There is nothing you can do to prevent crimes as long as there are people

When a crime such as this happens, the first reaction is to call for help from people armed with guns (and high capacity magazines)

We recently had a discussion about people injured in crossfires, and the risk is very small, judging by actual cases found

A high capacity magazine gives you an option, whether it's "needed" in all cases or not.

A good guy with a gun is what it takes to stop a bad guy with a gun


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Harry Chickpea said:


> "I am stumped on the obviously fake photo job. Looks like an official photo from a driver's license or some sort of ID to me."
> 
> Yep, looks exactly like the photo from an Alabama driver's license blown up. The artifacting is pretty normal for taking a low quality scan and enlarging it.
> 
> ...



I have to say my first thought when I heard about this one was I wonder if he got angry about his movie being interrupted by stupid people like the last guy who shot someone in a theater. I love movies and I love seeing them in the theater but these days people are such jerks it can be hard to see one.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Used to enjoy movies, going out but not so much anymore. Even the "sane" people are a pain in the behind to be around, not many seem to understand manners or personal space.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Patchouli said:


> I was in the military and I own several guns so yes I am well acquainted with how they work. And that for the very well trained/experienced shooter swapping out a smaller clip isn't that hard. Most of these people aren't well trained or experienced though. The example from the Arizona shooting is a good one.


Good, then you understand, or should anyway, why a larger clip is desired.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Patchouli said:


> I haven't read any Rambo type stories ever involving someone being attacked by a gang of thugs and needing a massive magazine in order to fend them off. Sounds more like a movie plot than reality.


http://www.ky3.com/news/local/raw-v...ple-in-downtown-springfield/21048998_27886102
http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/04/16/was-terrorist-act-man-attacked-gas-station-wants-justice
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/detroit...f-robbing-couples-gang-raping-female-victims/
http://www.twincities.com/crime/ci_23837611/st-paul-man-attacked-during-apparent-gang-fight


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Patchouli said:


> For the mentally ill?


For mentally ill that have been diagnosed as potentially dangerous or violent.

If we don't have the long term medical facilities to care for these people, maybe something similar to house arrest with an ankle monitor.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Harry Chickpea said:


> "I am stumped on the obviously fake photo job. Looks like an official photo from a driver's license or some sort of ID to me."
> 
> Yep, looks exactly like the photo from an Alabama driver's license blown up. The artifacting is pretty normal for taking a low quality scan and enlarging it.
> 
> ...


Already been done.
:ashamed:


----------



## Nimrod (Jun 8, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> Considering the fact that most of these shooters go in with a death wish (they either shoot themselves or hang out long enough for law enforcement to take them down) I don't think the knowledge that there might be someone who is armed wherever they are attacking will deter them. Might make them stealthier to get the maximum number of victims before they die but that's about it.


If this were true the crazies would shoot up a park or other public place where concealed carry is permitted. They have always selected "gun free zones".

They may be crazy but they aren't stupid.


----------



## Trixie (Aug 25, 2006)

Jolly said:


> In the old days, the Soviets would never publicize an event like this.
> 
> Don't know if that kept down the copy cat crazies, or not, but it's a thought...


Of course, if the agenda is to ban guns, then we must sensationalize - big time.

I do think it spawns copy cats, that doesn't mean I don't think it should be reported.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Originally Posted by Patchouli View Post
> Considering the fact that most of these shooters go in with a death wish (they either shoot themselves or hang out long enough for law enforcement to take them down) I don't think the knowledge that there might be someone who is armed wherever they are attacking will deter them. Might make them stealthier to get the maximum number of victims before they die but that's about it.


This one shot himself as soon as he saw someone else with a gun


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> I am stumped on the obviously fake photo job. Looks like an official photo from a driver's license or some sort of ID to me.
> 
> So far as how we address the mentally ill when it comes to forced psychiatric care I think maybe the pendulum swung too far on this one. There was a long period of time in our history when you could be carted off and locked for no real reason at all other than a family member wanted you out of the way. That was not good. Then in reaction to that we swung too far the other direction.
> 
> ...


That photo was reportedly the "updated" photo provided by the police. Not sure what updated meant. Searching images under his name only comes up with two results. One is that one, the other is one that is weirdly similar except angle and shape of his head. A little of the weird teal background can be seen under the collar of the same shirt in the other.


----------



## Woolieface (Feb 17, 2015)

Harry Chickpea said:


> "I am stumped on the obviously fake photo job. Looks like an official photo from a driver's license or some sort of ID to me."
> 
> Yep, looks exactly like the photo from an Alabama driver's license blown up. The artifacting is pretty normal for taking a low quality scan and enlarging it.
> 
> ...


That is a photoshop job. The "shadow" behind his head is a feature of many art programs called a drop shadow. That blue/green field behind him isn't real nor is he standing in front of it, the body has been pasted onto that background.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Woolieface said:


> That is a photoshop job. The "shadow" behind his head is a feature of many art programs called a drop shadow. That blue/green field behind him isn't real nor is he standing in front of it, the body has been pasted onto that background.


 The picture being used does appear to be a driver license photo and would require photo shopping to remove the gold state seal watermark validations that partially mark both the chest of the person and the background to prevent falsifying of drivers licenses.



The only way to prevent such events as the theatre shooting is better mental health services.

While the attack and resulting fatalities and injury with a firearm is a tragedy, due to things like the news and 21st century internet access to information, the mentally disturbed and suicidal attacker could have caused much more tragedy had he not had a firearm.

I am just glad that the guy didn't choose something like the marathon attackers and hide it in a popcorn tub or such.

Although this makes two times crazies have targeted theaters, GF and I don't fear going to the movies (except theatres that proudly proclaim their premises "gun free zone" potential targets) because we have always preferred sitting at the rear of the theatre near the exits anyway. 

Also the theatres we patronize do not prohibit all firearms and the ones that do partially prohibit firearms only have signs specifying that only licensed concealed carry is allowed and open carry in the theater is not allowed.

Interestingly the theaters with the conditional firearm restrictions don't seem to have any impact on the number of patrons attending showings.

Two also have off duty uniform LEOs who moonlight as security and often I know the LEOs working security.

Life in general is never totally safe. All any of us can do is to enjoy life and do so in a fashion as safely as possible for ourselves and our preferences for enjoying it.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

farmrbrown said:


> Good, then you understand, or should anyway, why a larger clip is desired.


If I was in Afghanistan I could understand why a larger clip is desired. Here not so much.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

These people are idiots. Call the police, don't wander out unarmed looking for the attackers. 
http://www.ky3.com/news/local/raw-v...ple-in-downtown-springfield/21048998_27886102

One shot from his wife in the truck and those kids would have scattered. 

http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/04/16/was-terrorist-act-man-attacked-gas-station-wants-justice

Hope they catch these scum. I wouldn't live in Detroit or walk down the street there. But I have to say it is one of the few places in America I would actually feel a need to be armed. 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/detroit...f-robbing-couples-gang-raping-female-victims/

Again people are just stupid. Why would you attempt to walk through a huge group of brawling teenagers? 

http://www.twincities.com/crime/ci_23837611/st-paul-man-attacked-during-apparent-gang-fight


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Patchouli said:


> If I was in Afghanistan I could understand why a larger clip is desired. Here not so much.


All I can offer is old advice given to me by my father and his father.

"Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it."


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Nimrod said:


> If this were true the crazies would shoot up a park or other public place where concealed carry is permitted. They have always selected "gun free zones".
> 
> They may be crazy but they aren't stupid.


No they don't. Again the Arizona shooter is a good example. Was the theater in LA or CO a gun free zone? The military base wasn't, they have armed guards at the gate. 

Churches have always been weapon free zones from the Temple in the OT straight on throughout the history of Christianity.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> This one shot himself as soon as he saw someone else with a gun


Right he went in with a death wish. Obviously he was more worried about being wounded and arrested so he made sure he was dead. So I guess the only question would be if he had seen a patron stand up in the theater and pull out a gun would he have had a shoot out or just shot himself. In a dark theater there is no telling if he even would have seen another person holding a weapon.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> Considering the fact that most of these shooters go in with a death wish (they either shoot themselves or hang out long enough for law enforcement to take them down) I don't think the knowledge that there might be someone who is armed wherever they are attacking will deter them. Might make them stealthier to get the maximum number of victims before they die but that's about it.


 
Then why do we not hear of mass shootings at shooting ranges, hunting camps, or, gun shows?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> The military base wasn't, they have *armed guards at the gate*.


It was a Naval Reserve center, and he drove through a closed, unguarded gate and shot 4 people in the parking lot

Most "normal" bases do have guards at all entrances

http://www.wsj.com/articles/police-pursue-gunman-in-chattanooga-tenn-1437065542


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> No they don't. Again the Arizona shooter is a good example. Was the theater in LA or CO a gun free zone? The military base wasn't, they have armed guards at the gate.
> 
> Churches have always been weapon free zones from the Temple in the OT straight on throughout the history of Christianity.


 Uh, yes they do, in the vast majority of cases. The theater in CO was a gun free zone, if fact, the animal passed up a couple that were not. I am not sure about the one in LA. Soldiers are, generally, not allowed to carry firearms on base. 

Actually, during Colonial times, it was expected and encouraged that people came to church armed. The law in South Carolina states that it is up to the leaders of the church as to weather guns are allowed, or, not.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> No they don't. Again the Arizona shooter is a good example. Was the theater in LA or CO a gun free zone? The military base wasn't, they have armed guards at the gate.
> 
> *Churches have always been weapon free zones* from the Temple in the OT straight on throughout the history of Christianity.


Both theaters prohibit firearms:

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/072312-619196-aurora-colorado-theater-gun-free-zone.htm


> Theatre In Aurora, Colorado, Was A Gun-Free Zone â¦
> news.investors.com/...619196-aurora-colorado-theater-gun-free-zone.htm
> Gun control advocates ignore that the theater in Aurora, Colo., like Virginia Tech, was a "gun-free" zone and may push a U.N. Arms Trade Treaty.


Many churches now allow guns, and I know of no laws that prevent it

I know of at least one instance where an armed parishioner stopped an active shooter, and I feel certain there are several. 

There was actually an example in the link above that I didn't even have to look for:


> On April 22 of this year a just-released felon went to the New Destiny Christian Church in Aurora, Colo., and killed the mother of Pastor Delano Strahan before being killed himself by a congregant carrying a gun.
> 
> Unlike the tragedies at Columbine High School and the movie theatre in Aurora, there was someone at these venues willing and able to shoot back.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Patchouli said:


> These people are idiots. Call the police, don't wander out unarmed looking for the attackers.
> http://www.ky3.com/news/local/raw-v...ple-in-downtown-springfield/21048998_27886102
> 
> One shot from his wife in the truck and those kids would have scattered.
> ...


Walking through a downtown tunnel after a concert is stupid? Never mind the issue of public safety and roving gangs of thugs. 

Regardless, you've ignored the point, that those links prove that there _are _gang attacks happening (with greater frequency), where something more than a pistol might be necessary to protect one's life.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> No they don't. Again the Arizona shooter is a good example. Was the theater in LA or CO a gun free zone? The military base wasn't, they have armed guards at the gate.
> 
> Churches have always been weapon free zones from the Temple in the OT straight on throughout the history of Christianity.


Of course the theaters were gun free zones.

I heard a couple black churches were going to carry after the Charleston slaughter...then no one interviewed any more, to my knowledge. Makes sense. But prolly was kept under wraps...

There was a church in Dallas several yrs ago, same thing happened, killed the pastor & several others...I should've looked it up, bet some bring their handguns now too.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> No they don't. Again the Arizona shooter is a good example. Was the theater in LA or CO a gun free zone? The military base wasn't, they have armed guards at the gate.
> 
> Churches have always been weapon free zones from the Temple in the OT straight on throughout the history of Christianity.


You're lumping the terrorist in w/the nut job. Well, I realize they all are but the terrorist will go shooting our military, mostly, and have stated as much, along w/families. They've been "called" to do this.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Farmerga said:


> Then why do we not hear of mass shootings at shooting ranges, hunting camps, or, gun shows?


Post of the day award.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I don't remember hearing about that one. Sad story.


Happened in 1990, ancient history for most people. Even if the average age of the people on the board is 35 that would mean most people were 10 or younger when it happened.

Add to that the fact that it doesn't fit the template the media has for such things its not going to be brought up.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Farmerga said:


> Uh, yes they do, in the vast majority of cases. The theater in CO was a gun free zone, if fact, the animal passed up a couple that were not. I am not sure about the one in LA. Soldiers are, generally, not allowed to carry firearms on base.
> 
> Actually, during Colonial times, it was expected and encouraged that people came to church armed. The law in South Carolina states that it is up to the leaders of the church as to weather guns are allowed, or, not.


Well America is it's own little messed up world sadly and Christianity and it's historical principles frequently fall to worship of this country. If you put your life and your patriotism before your Christianity you have a problem. Goodness knows it is so muddled up together in too many Churches these days so it can be hard to get down to the truth but it is there if you care to do a little study.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Patchouli said:


> No they don't. Again the Arizona shooter is a good example. Was the theater in LA or CO a gun free zone? The military base wasn't, they have armed guards at the gate.
> 
> Churches have always been weapon free zones from the Temple in the OT straight on throughout the history of Christianity.


 Not actually. Many churches , especially the more prestigious ones in large metropolitan areas, televised mega churches and nationally promoted revivals have had plain clothes armed security staff that are blended in with the congregation and usher staff. for decades. In the late 1960s I knew a neighbor who was employed by a large church in the area as armed plain clothes security and I overheard he and my father talking about how common it was for churches and religious gatherings then to employ armed security staff to protect members and the collections.

Since the shooting in Carolina five mid sized churches in our area have began arming members of their usher staff for safety and it was published in an article in the Religion section of the paper that they were going through the same certification and school attack response training as the law enforcement officers go through and churches of all sizes are requesting members who are law enforcement employed to volunteer for security details also.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Txsteader said:


> Walking through a downtown tunnel after a concert is stupid? Never mind the issue of public safety and roving gangs of thugs.
> 
> Regardless, you've ignored the point, that those links prove that there _are _gang attacks happening (with greater frequency), where something more than a pistol might be necessary to protect one's life.





> One of the victims, Meredith Cole, says the attack started while her boyfriend, Alex, was working as a DJ at the Outland Ballroom. She said she was approached by a group of men outside the club, and they began to sexually assault her. Cole says she returned inside the club to alert her boyfriend, who then left the club to try to identify who her attackers are.


Call the police. Pure and simple. They were just idiots.

The only case where the attacker's were armed was the Detroit one. 1 guy with a gun in both attacks. So again unless you are walking into a fully armed gang so long as you also have a gun and some basic common sense you still don't need a huge clip. One shot would have worked in 3 of those cases and the guy who walked into 30-50 brawling gang members was obviously looking for a Darwin award.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Shrek said:


> Not actually. Many churches , especially the more prestigious ones in large metropolitan areas, televised mega churches and nationally promoted revivals have had plain clothes armed security staff that are blended in with the congregation and usher staff. for decades. In the late 1960s I knew a neighbor who was employed by a large church in the area as armed plain clothes security and I overheard he and my father talking about how common it was for churches and religious gatherings then to *employ armed security staff to protect members and the collections.*
> 
> Since the shooting in Carolina five mid sized churches in our area have began arming members of their usher staff for safety and it was published in an article in the Religion section of the paper that they were going through the same certification and school attack response training as the law enforcement officers go through and churches of all sizes are requesting members who are law enforcement employed to volunteer for security details also.


:facepalm: I will just refer to an old story that has made the rounds for ages:

The two thousand member church was filled to overflowing capacity one Sunday morning. The preacher was ready to start the sermon when two men, dressed in long black coats and black hats entered thru the rear of the church. One of the two men walked to the middle of the church while the other stayed at the back of the church. They both then reached under their coats and withdrew automatic weapons. The one in the middle announced, âEveryone willing to take a bullet for Jesus stay in your seats!â Naturally, the pews emptied, followed by the choir. The deacons ran out the door, followed by the choir director and the assistant pastor. After a few moments, there were about twenty people left sitting in the church. The preacher was holding steady in the pulpit. The men put their weapons away and said, gently, to the preacher, âAll right, pastor, the hypocrites are gone now. You may begin the service."


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Tricky Grama said:


> You're lumping the terrorist in w/the nut job. Well, I realize they all are but the terrorist will go shooting our military, mostly, and have stated as much, along w/families. They've been "called" to do this.


Well except he wasn't a radicalized terrorist he was just a mentally ill young man who chose suicide by military and got police instead. You will have to take off those anti-Islam glasses to see that.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Farmerga said:


> Then why do we not hear of mass shootings at shooting ranges, hunting camps, or, gun shows?



Gun shows are easy: you have to unload your gun before you can get in. Yes I have been to a few.

Shooting ranges sadly do have shootings. The most famous one would be the shooting of Chris Kyle and Chad Littlefield. But they happen more often than they are widely reported:

http://fortressamerica.gawker.com/many-people-are-killing-with-rented-guns-at-shooting-ra-1635909117


> Brooks reports that the CDC has tracked about 50 suicides at gun ranges in recent years, but that's only from piecemeal stats in a handful of states&#8212;and it doesn't include freewheeling Florida, where there have been a rash of range deaths, including a handful in Tampa Bay and a whopping 11 with rented guns in the Orlando area alone since 2009, prompting some range owners to shut down their rental operations.


Hunting camp deaths tend to be all about alcohol.....


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Patchouli said:


> :facepalm: I will just refer to an old story that has made the rounds for ages:
> 
> The two thousand member church was filled to overflowing capacity one Sunday morning. The preacher was ready to start the sermon when two men, dressed in long black coats and black hats entered thru the rear of the church. One of the two men walked to the middle of the church while the other stayed at the back of the church. They both then reached under their coats and withdrew automatic weapons. The one in the middle announced, âEveryone willing to take a bullet for Jesus stay in your seats!â Naturally, the pews emptied, followed by the choir. The deacons ran out the door, followed by the choir director and the assistant pastor. After a few moments, there were about twenty people left sitting in the church. The preacher was holding steady in the pulpit. The men put their weapons away and said, gently, to the preacher, âAll right, pastor, the hypocrites are gone now. You may begin the service."


Apparently you don't realize the size of collections in some of those mega-churches.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Well except he wasn't a radicalized terrorist he was just a mentally ill young man who chose suicide by military and got police instead. You will have to take off those anti-Islam glasses to see that.


The Islamic terrorist who just shot up the recruiting center, then the base? You don't think this should be called terrorism? Have you seen the commands to kill our servicemen here & abroad? Didn't see his writings?


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Txsteader said:


> Apparently you don't realize the size of collections in some of those mega-churches.


I realize what Jesus had to say about money.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Tricky Grama said:


> The Islamic terrorist who just shot up the recruiting center, then the base? You don't think this should be called terrorism? Have you seen the commands to kill our servicemen here & abroad? Didn't see his writings?


I have seen a whole lot of people trying to make him out to be a terrorist but no proof whatsoever of it.


----------



## Txsteader (Aug 22, 2005)

Patchouli said:


> I realize what Jesus had to say about money.


Did ye miss the part about paying tithes and alms?


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> Gun shows are easy: you have to unload your gun before you can get in. Yes I have been to a few.
> 
> Shooting ranges sadly do have shootings. The most famous one would be the shooting of Chris Kyle and Chad Littlefield. But they happen more often than they are widely reported:
> 
> ...


 I didn't say there were no shootings at those events, it is just that you don't hear of MASS shootings at those events. Good armed people will not stop bad people from shooting other people, they will just be in the position to stop them from shooting several other people all at once. It is said that the animal who shot up the Charleston church re-loaded 5 times. If one of those good people were armed, that animal could have been put down when one or two were dead instead of nine. If those Chattanooga Marines were allowed to carry, it is likely that none of them would have been killed and he certainly wouldn't have made it to the second location. 

The fact of the matter is that, if it were known that some of those victims may have been armed, it is likely that the shootings would have never taken place because the cowards, who wish to shoot mass numbers of people, are looking for "soft" targets.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I realize what Jesus had to say about money.


Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

plowjockey said:


> Unfortunately, we are just going to have to accept it, as a fact of modern life.
> 
> We have 300 million guns and 300 million people, many who are angry, senile, on pills or booze, depressed, anxious, racist, xenophobic. (maybe all of the above) Whatever doesnt matter.
> 
> ...


And if guns were unavailable, they'd use another method


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

DryHeat said:


> Certainly tighter enforcement of the permit system is needed.


There's quite a bit I disagree with in your post, but this part really stands out.
Keeping and bearing arms is a right, not a privilege. 
The fact that we are forced to buy a permit to carry a gun is unconstitutional at best, and illegal at worst.
What other right do we have that needs a permit?
I don't have to have a permit to own a gun, but I do have to have one to carry concealed.
More and more states are going to "Constitutional carry" which seems like a good idea to me.
Why the left leaning politicians and their handlers are so eager to disarm honest people is beyond me. It has to be about control, there's no other reason.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> I haven't read any Rambo type stories ever involving someone being attacked by a gang of thugs and needing a massive magazine in order to fend them off. Sounds more like a movie plot than reality.


You won't hear of it in the main stream media propaganda machine, but people use guns every day to defend themselves and their loved ones.
Unfortunately, that doesn't fit in the agenda of the ruling class, so mum's the word.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> I was in the military and I own several guns so yes I am well acquainted with how they work. And that for the very well trained/experienced shooter swapping out a smaller *clip *isn't that hard. Most of these people aren't well trained or experienced though. The example from the Arizona shooting is a good one.


Clip?
No offense, but maybe you should acquaint a little more :thumb:


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Tricky Grama said:


> The Islamic terrorist who just shot up the recruiting center, then the base? You don't think this should be called terrorism? Have you seen the commands to kill our servicemen here & abroad? Didn't see his writings?


He had also made a trip to the middle east, not sure where, but it was being looked in to.
He was a radical muslim, Obama won't let his followers admit that, it looks bad for the agenda.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> I realize what Jesus had to say about money.


What did he say?


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Cornhusker said:


> Clip?
> No offense, but maybe you should acquaint a little more :thumb:


Magazine.... Yay for you.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Cornhusker said:


> What did he say?





> Matt 5:24 &#8220;No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money."
> 
> Matt 6:19-21 &#8220;Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."
> 
> ...



Fat wealthy churches don't seem to be his thing do they? Or churches that feel a need to protect their money with armed guards. 



> Revelations 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;
> 15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
> 16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
> 17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
> ...


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Patchouli said:


> Fat wealthy churches don't seem to be his thing do they? Or churches that feel a need to protect their money with armed guards.


Not too many really wealthy churches today, the economy isn't good enough.

I don't belong to a large church. I think a lot of large churches have turned into a social center, rather than a worship center. But different strokes for different folks - if you like the big church, fine by me.

As for the armed guards - only prudent considering today's social climate.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

I don't think the fat cats at the top are doing too badly. All that tax free money and they only spend 10% on anything outside their own churches.


----------



## Wanda (Dec 19, 2002)

Jolly said:


> Not too many really wealthy churches today, the economy isn't good enough.
> 
> I don't belong to a large church. I think a lot of large churches have turned into a social center, rather than a worship center. But different strokes for different folks - if you like the big church, fine by me.
> 
> As for the armed guards - only prudent considering today's social climate.


In my part of the country you can pick up a plat book and find thousands of acres of very valuable farm land owned by churches and hospitals. Doesn't take much land to add up to a million bucks.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

> Then why do we not hear of mass shootings at shooting ranges, hunting camps, or, gun shows?


Not necessarily a "mass shooting", but theses events are happening..



> Mr. Routh, 27, shot Mr. Kyle and Mr. Littlefield in the back on Feb. 2, 2013, at a gun range near this small town 100 miles southwest of Dallas, after Mr. Routhâs mother had asked Mr. Kyle to befriend her son.


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/25/u...al-jury-finds-ex-marine-guilty-of-murder.html

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=gun+range+shooting+death&start=10


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Cornhusker said:


> There's quite a bit I disagree with in your post, but this part really stands out.
> Keeping and bearing arms is a right, not a privilege.
> The fact that we are forced to buy a permit to carry a gun is unconstitutional at best, and illegal at worst.
> What other right do we have that needs a permit?
> ...


Well, sure, we have the right of free speech & need that license that says you can speak here & here & here. Oh wait...
Well, there's that license we have to have when we walk into church. Oh, guess not...yet.
Then there's that permit we need if we're Tea Party & gonna congregate...


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> Magazine.... Yay for you.


Well, if you are going to claim expert, you should get the names right. :thumb:


----------

