Walmart Sued by Couple Wounded in El Paso Mass Shooting By Jonathan Stempel | September 5, 2019 Email This Subscribe to Newsletter Email to a friend Facebook Tweet LinkedIn Print Article Article 93 Comments September 5, 2019 at 7:58 am retired risk manager says: Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 58 4OK, lets review the case law. The Texas Supreme Court has ruled that premise owners are NOT liable for the criminal acts of third parties. There are a couple of unique exceptions to this. If the owner is aware of criminal activity inside the store is the main one. The owner is not required to even monitor criminal activity in the surrounding area. If Walmart has security at other stores, so what. This a baseless lawsuit. It would normally be dismissed at the trial court level. But this is El Paso. Walmart should seek sanctions against the attorney for even filing. September 5, 2019 at 10:20 am SWFL Agent says: Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 43 2The desire and ability to shift blame in our country has become much too commonplace. If the Garcia’s were concerned about their safety they could have asked Walmart if security was available. September 5, 2019 at 10:44 am retired risk manager says: Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 38 2I would opine that the Garcia’s have shopped at this location many times before. Also, the request for information on something that happened in 2016 at a location in Amarillo is beyond belief. Amarillo is at least 600 miles from El Paso. Typical plaintiff attorney tactics. September 5, 2019 at 1:37 pm NY Broker says: Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 31 6If the Garcia’s were so worried about their safety shopping at this particular Walmart, they have choices – carry a licensed weapon or don’t shop there. it is legal to carry a licensed weapon in Texas, as far as I know. September 5, 2019 at 1:19 pm Boonedoggle says: Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: 10 24Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.If the NRA possessed even a thimble of conscience and integrity they would volunteer to defend and indemnify Walmart, the Las Vegas Hotel and the other businesses who have been sued due to the injuries and deaths caused by the AR styled murder rifles, the weapons the NRA so aggressively promotes. September 5, 2019 at 2:18 pm PolarBeaRepeal says: Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 32 16The NRA, contrary to comm… liberal beliefs, promotes the safe use of firearms. The actions of one cannot be assigned to the actions of many. September 5, 2019 at 3:34 pm Jon says: Hot debate. What do you think? 14 21LOL the NRA promotes safe use, they just want EVERYBODY using safely. Because, you know, too many guns isn’t a crisis or anything. You’re throwing gasoline on the fire and saying you’ll burn the fire out faster than water will put it out, dummies. September 9, 2019 at 1:26 pm mrbob says: Like or Dislike: 4 7Jon, There is always that pesky second amendment line of shall not be infringed. I have 3 AR platform rifles and they all shoot straight and perform the mission I intend of them. It is not the number of weapons in this country it is our broken mental health system. September 9, 2019 at 1:45 pm STOP says: Like or Dislike: 7 2So then stop voting for the idiots that keep defunding mental health programs. September 9, 2019 at 3:11 pm Jon says: Like or Dislike: 10 2The issue there is that while your side is quick to blame mental illness, they’re almost totally unwilling to do anything about it. Your side is why mental health has fallen so much after all. It also doesn’t help that the right shuts down any question of mental health evaluations for gun ownership. It’s pretty simple, if mental health is the problem, integrate mental health checks into the gun ownership system. This actually looks to a solution instead of just blaming mental health and shrugging your shoulders. The “thoughts and prayers” system is clearly not working. Also, you work in insurance, what “mission” could you possibly have? This mentality on the right is awfully frightening and abundant. Maybe the fact that so many of you treat your mundane lives like you’re soldiers of Fortune is why you all fight mental health integration? September 10, 2019 at 4:25 pm bob says: Like or Dislike: 1 5You are patently absurd. The right has refused maybe one mental health bill recently, and it was solely to how the democrats defined mental health. They made it so non violent health issues would be considered. You aren’t likely to be violent as an older person who can’t remember their pin code. It would have led to gun rights being taken away from aging folks. They were clear on it. When republicans have offered mental health solutions, and they have a lot, the left says this: https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/374304-dems-say-gop-focus-on-mental-health-is-redirection-from-gun-control “We should fix our mental health system, but we can’t let the gun lobby get away with suggesting that mental health is the problem,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said in a statement.” In other words, they won’t allow mental health bills that don’t restrict gun sales period. They view any guns as bad. That is why the right doesn’t allow most their other bills, which try to lead to banning guns. You are such a left wing pundit. What has the right ever done that you agree with? September 11, 2019 at 1:06 am Jon says: Like or Dislike: 6 2LOL Bob you continue to be a joke. Reagan is responsible for the mental health crisis, your guy, I’m sorry you only pay attention to “recent” but the fact is an icon of the right caused where we are on that front. Additionally, you started with an insult off the bat because you have no real argument. Even your quote from the left isn’t anything negative, the fact is something should be done about guns as well. The left recognizes that the right is only willing to acknowledge mental health as a band-aid to the current gun problem, in no other capacity does the right show any consistency in acknowledging mental health as an issue. You’re a right-wing pawn trying to pass as a moderate, and you’re transparent. Nice try though LOL September 5, 2019 at 1:25 pm glassflower says: Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 42 3OK, so they knew that there were no armed security guards at this store and chose to shop here…even though they knew of other locations that had armed security guards that made them feel more secure shopping there. Sounds like they made an informed choice to shop that particular location. I do have to comment that after hearing of the brave actions of so many Walmart employees during and after the shooting, This duo just disgusts me. That said, they can easily lock themselves into their homes and just order everything on Amazon and other on-line retailers. After all…you can buy EVERYTHING on line now-a-days. September 5, 2019 at 4:22 pm Cicero says: Like or Dislike: 8 11Such empathy in the responses so far! September 5, 2019 at 5:32 pm helpingout says: Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 22 11Most people here gun control and a lawsuit and they automatically jump for personal responsibility and that by walking into an unguarded store they should have felt comfortable shopping there. I disagree with this wholeheartedly as by walking into any store they should feel safe from being assaulted. I will again outline what I think of reasonable steps for additional gun control measures I have posted before and would again love healthy discussion. If you just want to argue and be rude, then I will probably not engage. I added one metric for private sales. I am not on the right, I am an independent, but I will give my own idea on gun safety. 1. Universal background checks, that is in every single state. with no discrepancy for what they check for 2. Cool, now you passed the background check, now go take a class on how to properly store and use your weapon safely. 3. Cool now you passed, you can now own a handgun for personal protection, or a hunting rifle. 4. Okay, you want to own something that is not on the list above, my apologizes, but civilians should not have these weapons, but you can go to a shooting range and try these weapons out for fun, but you will have to take one more safety class so we know you and those around you will be safe. 5. People who have more than one instance of domestic violence should not be able to own a gun, they are more likely to use those later and could potentially harm their partner, and any children within the household 6. Red Flag laws should be implemented with a court order, but one should be able to take those to court and have a judge decide what is in the best interest of the public 7. My only last point is to have gun shows *and private sales* follow the same rules for selling weapons to individuals as the store, and any person failing to follow these rules should have fine for the first few times, followed by more stringent oversight for future failures. Would you say the above is reasonable, if not what would you recommend? September 5, 2019 at 9:25 pm craig cornell says: Hot debate. What do you think? 13 12If you are trying to solve the problem of mass shootings, I would say only Red Flag laws might make a difference. Most of the mass killers passed background checks in the past. And I highly doubt you are going to round up weapons in mass quantities from criminals and thugs, let alone private citizens who aren’t harming anyone. That’s like taking away cars from everyone because some people drive drunk. And millions of gun sales are illegal now and new laws won’t change that. Not to mention the fact that rifles of all sorts are only responsible for less than 10% of murders. Handguns are the real killer (but who cares about dead black people in Chicago, right?) There is a MUCH bigger problem in America with young men and if you aren’t going to look at the issue honestly and completely, mass killers will just find another way. In the 1950s, you could order a gun from JC Penney and have it mailed to you. Including pistols that shot multiple rounds. Total number of mass killings in the 1950s in the USA according to the FBI: 1. (Independent? Say what?) September 6, 2019 at 12:17 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 1 6https://www.nationalreview.com/news/gun-used-in-texas-shooting-illegally-manufactured-sold-report/ September 6, 2019 at 2:17 pm Jon says: Like or Dislike: 8 3https://www.allsides.com/news-source/national-review https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/national-review/ https://www.quora.com/How-accurate-is-the-news-source-National-Review You’re posting things from a right-wing opinion website and calling them fact. Nice try though, maybe find some sources that actually care about truth and fact? September 6, 2019 at 2:19 pm Jon says: Like or Dislike: 7 3So: https://www.quora.com/How-accurate-is-the-news-source-National-Review https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/national-review/ https://www.allsides.com/news-source/national-review This didn’t post the first time, but yeah you’re posting a conservative right-wing opinion site as fact. Try to find un-biased information? September 6, 2019 at 2:41 pm helpingout says: Like or Dislike: 9 2This article does not state the gun was purchased illegally. It does say they believe it could have been purchased illegally or through a private sale. One reason I added the new idea to have private sales follow the guidelines that stores have. September 6, 2019 at 2:45 pm Jon says: Like or Dislike: 7 6I tried posting three separate links and for some reason the post didn’t go through. National Review is a right-wing opinion site trying to pass as news. This information is available to anyone with a search engine and a brain. Nice try, trying to pass off misinformation as fact though bud. September 9, 2019 at 10:47 am Jack says: Like or Dislike: 1 6https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/official-feds-search-home-link-gun-texas-shooting-65407310 Guess you didn’t have a search engine or a brain to find this on a left-wing opinion site like i did. September 9, 2019 at 11:20 am Jon says: Like or Dislike: 4 2Your first article was about how the gun was supposedly manufactured and sold illegally. The second article is just how the feds searched the texas shooting gunman’s home. What are you saying? This is meaningless, it’s like you said we can’t take away our guns because it’s Tuesday. Try to keep a coherent argument maybe? September 9, 2019 at 11:39 am Jack says: Like or Dislike: 1 5Jon- read the 1st paragraph 3 more times and try to comprehend it this time. You should change your name to boxorocs2. September 10, 2019 at 11:01 am Jon says: Like or Dislike: 3 2Once again, nobody gets that reference. September 6, 2019 at 10:05 am SWFL Agent says: Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 19 0Cicero, I suspect most of us on this site do have sympathy for the victims and more importantly we all wish we had a an easy, proven solution that could solve this. But specifically to this article, I don’t have sympathy for the attorney or the Garcia’s that want to turn this into a “Walmart problem”. I’m sorry, I just don’t see that it’s Walmart’s responsibility to plan and protect for mass shooters. September 11, 2019 at 3:16 pm Jax Agent says: Like or Dislike: 0 1Empathy ?? LOL, what a twinky. This article and ensuing discussion has not one thing to do with empathy. Does the plaintiff have the legal right to bring suit ? Does the plaintiff have grounds to bring suit ? Is this just another extortion try by a desperate trial lawyer who doesn’t know the statutes of the state he is trying to bring said lawsuit in ? If you are looking for empathy, I hear that the Hallmark website message board has a lot of it and it comes with tissues. September 6, 2019 at 1:05 am Jon says: Like or Dislike: 9 9Is your assertion that most mass killers passed a background check like your assertion that 26 out of 27 of the last mass killers were fatherless? Because that was proven incorrect, and yet you keep making grand generalized claims like this without citing references. It’s not even about taking away what’s out there, how about just moving forward? Why do you conservatives always immediately go on the defensive here instead of trying for a solution? Millions of gun sales are illegal? really? Millions? Because per https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-traffickingprivate-sales-statistics/ , Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy, Duke University estimates a half a million a year.I like how you use words to subtly exaggerate, but I can actually look things up. I like how your side likes to blame mental illness, while completely ignoring the link between the two. Why not mental health screenings for households that want to own firearms? It’s pretty simple. You like to reference the 1950s JC penny gun catalog, but it was a specific hunting rifle. Not an assault rifle, not a handgun, a hunting rifle. Guns of the ability we currently have were introduced much later, when, shock, mass killings started to rise more. Nice try though. September 10, 2019 at 4:37 pm bob says: Like or Dislike: 0 5“I like how your side likes to blame mental illness, while completely ignoring the link between the two. Why not mental health screenings for households that want to own firearms? It’s pretty simple. ” Households? As in a person cannot own a firearm if they have a disturbed son? I think not. If anything, PERSON. Individual. As for mental health screenings: Orwellian. The government has numerous times shown they are not to be trusted with this, and have literally been on the wrong side of history every time they do. Hello screen for gays and mental health facilities for them back in the day. We are not doing mental health screenings. Also, studies show the most likely person to be shot by a gun, and thus need self defense, are those with disorders. Not all people with disorders are shooters. There is next to no way you can do mental health in a way that will not have a negative impact, and you are next to zero likely to stop most mass shooters. They don’t typically show signs, not ones that couldn’t be linked to most people out there anyway. Working on mental health as I have worded it, would never involve mental health screenings by the government. Instead, it would involve ground up helping the poor, who are most vulnerable, giving them programs that make them not feel left by the wayside, during school ending the absurd over steps the schools have had for discipline and expulsion of troubled folks, and instead helping them, (instead of bully bad, remove him, help him) seriously looking at our over prescribed ADD pill issue and how men are treated in schools, seriously consider changing school systems to assist with healthy masculinity, remove any teachings of toxic masculinity, stop shaming men and up lift them, so they don’t have shame or alternatively rage, and move along telling kids in school therapy isn’t a bad thing and have it included in school funding, at the option of those who need it, or, for those who have severe issues say it’s that or a different thing like community service, so the rebel will go to therapy avoiding community service and have a shot, and the rebel on the other side who refuses therapy does community service which can be rewarding. The government, should NEVER be in the field of denying rights based on mental health screenings. September 11, 2019 at 1:14 am Jon says: Like or Dislike: 6 2I’m up and angry, why not play this game? You make it so easy. “Households? As in a person cannot own a firearm if they have a disturbed son? I think not. If anything, PERSON. Individual.” Yes, sorry, if you have a teenage son capable of a dangerous attack and you have an assault rifle in the house, you probably shouldn’t have a gun in the house. We don’t allow anyone off the street to buy explosives either. Use some common sense judgement and apply it to literally anything else in your life. If you have a disturbed son, do you leave your knives and rope lying around? No. You’re potentially putting other people at risk because you want to have something while having a potentially dangerous person in the house. Sorry. I’m not going to quote the rest, because you’re blatantly false. A big reason the right likely is fighting mental health screenings with your logic? Because a lot of members of the right would likely not pass. You’ve shown a willingness to create false realities (studies have shown the most likely to be shot are those with mental disorders? Okay, let’s see the studies. Link to them. Multiple ones that confirm this. Yeah I thought so) Also, are you a mental health professional? No? Then I think you’re full of it. You’re once again going into a long-winded, idealistic, unrealistic solution instead of using common sense and pragmatism to tackle a problem. It is quite simple if you stop looking at every solution but the one staring you in the face. And once more, no one cares about your blog dude. Seriously, go to group and stop trying to hint at your life story on here. September 6, 2019 at 9:14 am Jack says: Hot debate. What do you think? 13 18Here’s the questions on the mental health screen test. 1. Are you homophobic? 2. Are you islamophobic? 3. Are you a Christian? 4. Are you White? 5. Did you vote Republican? Answering yes to any of the above gets you gun permit denied. No thanks. I’ll keep my guns….all of them!! September 6, 2019 at 9:25 am helpingout says: Like or Dislike: 13 5I hope this is all in good fun, because ignoring the issue has only exacerbated our problems with guns in the US. You are part of the issue, civilians should not own anything more than I outlined above. I thought the caveat that with extra training you can go to a gun range and use those guns would alleviate some issues that you seem to have, but again there are some people unwilling to change, and that is an issue with evolving our culture to a place we should be. September 9, 2019 at 1:31 pm mrbob says: Like or Dislike: 1 5Helpingout, It is so nice of you to add your opinions to the topic. I have one problem though the 2nd amendment ends with shall not be infringed. If you think you can get that changed then go ahead and try. September 9, 2019 at 1:41 pm helpingout says: Like or Dislike: 3 1Mr bob, (is this bob or a different person?) It is possible to change the constitution, we have done this multiple times throughout our history. Constitutional amendments helped push us into the modern age with some of our policies and we were at the forefront of some social movements, but that is no longer the case today. The crux of the argument is that this was written when we still didn’t have police or a real military and were a militia based country. We have evolved since then, and I am not against people having guns as I do believe it is a right, but when we have guns in the hands of untrained people with anything more that I outlined, I think we should make an amendment to get into modern times. The issue is that if we did have a government that was being tyrannical, they have weapons that far outclass what civilians have even at today’s level. September 10, 2019 at 4:27 pm bob says: Like or Dislike: 1 1The above Bob is not me. I never alter my name at all. It is always bob. September 9, 2019 at 5:07 pm Curious says: Like or Dislike: 4 2Does your 2nd amendment right to guns outweigh the god-given right to life? September 10, 2019 at 11:00 am Jon says: Like or Dislike: 3 4Sadly, since this is America, yes. These people would rather have their guns than have the amount of gun related deaths per year plummet. Evidence contrary to their beliefs are met with denial and rage, as Jack has shown time and time again. September 10, 2019 at 3:16 pm Jon says: Like or Dislike: 3 3This isn’t about abortion, and frankly it’s off-subject and ridiculous to make it about that. You’re pointing fingers and yelling like the cantankerous old-person you are, not actually trying to debate, educate or learn. September 10, 2019 at 3:58 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 2 3John- If you and curious can’t comprehend the 2nd only gives us a right and doesn’t take away a right you are both intolerant of the Constitution and therefore are Constitutionophobic. September 10, 2019 at 4:05 pm Captain Planet says: Like or Dislike: 3 0Jack, what militia are you in? I have no problem with someone owning a firearm to defend herself. But, we obviously have laws against certain types of firearms, and I think that should be part of the discussion. Otherwise, I’d like to purchase a nuke since that is the only way I would be able to compete with a tyrannical US government. Which, as I understand, is one of the reasons some out there argue for owning military grade firearms. Good luck defending yourself against an army full of tanks with your AR. September 10, 2019 at 4:47 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 0 2Captain plant- 1. Yes, we already have laws against owning nukes. 2. I agree it’s hard to find a high capacity musket these days. 3. AR’s sold on the market to citizens are not military grade automatics. 4. I don’t have to defend myself against tanks, that will be the job of the patriots that are driving probably more than 50% of the tanks that will be involved. You don’t really think most of the boys in uniform are going to fire on US citizens do you? If so, stop watching CNN. 5. Molon labe September 10, 2019 at 6:08 pm Captain Planet says: Like or Dislike: 2 0I didn’t catch it. What is the name of that militia again? OK, so we agree – there will be no such threat by a tyrannical government here. A majority of our men and women in uniform wouldn’t act in such a way, even if this president told them to. Sweet, glad we see eye to eye there. September 11, 2019 at 1:19 am Jon says: Like or Dislike: 2 1LOL Jack do you think coming up with words to try and label people who disagree with you takes away from YOUR OWN POSTS which have shown you to be so far, racist, homophobic, sexist, and casual about dropping the R-word in regards to those with cognitive impairments. Yeah, you’re a real salt of the earth type. September 11, 2019 at 2:16 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 1 1John- Thinking criminals will obey gun laws shows a cognitive impairment and is very R. September 11, 2019 at 2:27 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 1 1Cap Plant- I’m sorry, forgot your first question. Sons of the American Revolution. I didn’t say there is “no threat”. I said most will not fire on Americans. There is a small % that will simply follow orders, the ones that have been taught to hate the US. That small % will get their heads kicked in. Molon Labe! September 11, 2019 at 3:20 pm Jax Agent says: Like or Dislike: 1 1Curious, that is a pretty stupid question. Perhaps a ‘go back and try again’ would be in order ? September 6, 2019 at 10:58 am Jon says: Like or Dislike: 8 9So you’re saying you want bigots and racists to have guns? LOL I’m not surprised by ignorant views from you in the slightest. Additionally we do have freedom of religion here, so the fact that a simple lawsuit would destroy any religious questioning should be evident. I guess we can’t expect you to actually use your brain in this matter though. September 6, 2019 at 11:19 am Jack says: Hot debate. What do you think? 14 7big·ot /ˈbiɡət/ noun a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions. Jon- your comment leads me to believe you are also a bigot. September 6, 2019 at 1:47 pm UGH says: Like or Dislike: 13 6So wait. You want us to be tolerant of your bigotry or else that makes us bigots??? Do you see how stupid that sounds? September 6, 2019 at 1:55 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 7 8UGH – you must be about as dumb as a box of rocks if you didn’t get that one. September 6, 2019 at 2:13 pm Jon says: Like or Dislike: 8 7LOL Jack you’re taking the “NUH-UH” route of argument. You’re never going to win when you side with bigots. Maybe take up shuffleboard? September 6, 2019 at 2:29 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 6 8a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions. What exactly don’t you and boxorocs understand? September 6, 2019 at 2:38 pm helpingout says: Like or Dislike: 11 5Jack, I am going to say that their issues stem from your first two questions about being homophobic and Islamophobic. By putting that in there, it has an indication that you may fall into those categories, and if you do fall within those categories you are a bigot. It does not help that because you failed to realize this you called ugh as dumb as a rock. One other thing that is an issue with you logic is that you were overly sensitive about Jon’s mental health screen test and made it out to be political rather than the crux of the argument which deals with real mental diseases. By making a jest at this you were intolerant of his ideas indicating exactly what your definition pointed out. Intolerant of those holding different beliefs. You haven’t engaged constructively, rather just deflect. What do you not understand? September 9, 2019 at 10:28 am Jack says: Like or Dislike: 6 7Helpingout- My point was EVERYONE IS A BIGOT!!!! We all have our own opinions don’t we? You being intolerant about me having a different opinion on questions 1 and 2 indicate you are a bigot as well. The left does NOT get to define bigotry, it’s been defined for years. See above. My point with the questions was simply this, WHO gets to decide what questions to ask? With all the labels put on Trump and his voters, WHY would you think anyone would agree to let the left define what mental illness is? I’ll keep my guns, ALL OF THEM. September 9, 2019 at 11:22 am Jon says: Like or Dislike: 6 5Everyone’s a bigot, so it’s okay to be homophobic and racist? Again, what are you arguing here? You’re likening hateful ideologies to disagreeing with political opinions which sets a dangerous precedent. You’re arguing that because you might get treated differently for being racist or homophobic that we shouldn’t use a system of mental health evaluations? Maybe you should try more understanding and less fear and hatred. Once again, no one is trying to take your guns. September 9, 2019 at 1:36 pm helpingout says: Like or Dislike: 7 3Jack, I will say you are the one making that connections between hateful ideologies and political affiliation. You are the one likening disagreements between the political spectrum to intolerance. That is not true, but let’s move past that point as most people here understand that point that disagreeing on a political level is different than people who are intolerant of those with different beliefs (homophobia and Islamophobia that you outlined above). It isn’t a republican (or liberal or anything political) thing, it is a bigotry thing plain and simple. Oh also your link above doesn’t prove the gun was purchased illegally, they are looking to see if it was a possibility. Other possibilities include a gun show or just a private sale like a family member. Good effort in trying to pass a possibility off as a fact, but it won’t work if you read the links. September 6, 2019 at 12:22 pm Boonedoggle says: Like or Dislike: 9 7Arguably, most if not all of us in this forum are associated with the property casualty insurance industry and should have elevated knowledge of tort liability. Hopefully, we should all share desire that our civil legal system play out on a level playing field. We therefore need to look at the big picture of who is being held financially accountable for these horrific mass shootings, and who is being blessed with total immunity. In the instant case Walmart is being sued as if they somehow breached a duty of guarantying the absolute safety of their customers. There is no assertion that Walmart sold the weapon or the ammunition. To the contrary, several years ago Walmart ended sale of AR-15 styled murder rifles. A parallel can be drawn to the Las Vegas slaughter, which ended up in 58 murdered, 422 shot and a total of 851 people injured including those who were trampled in the chaos. Yes, that case brought litigation, but the defendents are MGM Resorts and the organizer of the concert. Who was not sued? Not the gun store who sold the arsenal. Not the manufacturers of the over 1100 rounds which were expended, and not the manufacturer of the AR-15 murder rifle. To the contrary, the management of those enterprises probably displayed broad smiles as they hauled their profits from the carnage to the bank. While I do not want to direct sole blame on the firearms industry, wouldn’t it be nice if they were not given a pre-emptive “get out of jail card”. If we are going to have legitimate civil justice system, why not make everyone play by the same rules? September 6, 2019 at 12:31 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 7 10Ya had me until “murder rifles”. What next “murder pistols”, “murder baseball bats”? September 6, 2019 at 2:15 pm Jon says: Like or Dislike: 9 10Yeah, because baseball bats murder people just as often as guns. For someone who likes to call others dumb or idiots, you sure don’t seem like you’re playing with a full deck. September 6, 2019 at 1:26 pm Jack says: Hot debate. What do you think? 14 11Only a fool would give up a weapon in order for the government to protect them. The government can’t even stop a telemarketer. September 6, 2019 at 2:15 pm Jon says: Hot debate. What do you think? 11 9No one asked you to give up weapons. You sure do go on the defensive quick though, wonder why? September 9, 2019 at 10:41 am Jack says: Like or Dislike: 3 7Jon – actually they do. Listen to your liberal candidates for pres. Educate yourself about the issues. September 10, 2019 at 11:02 am Jon says: Like or Dislike: 3 3Says the man who keeps his fingers in his ears to every matter concerning gun violence? I meant on this board. We’re not arguing for taking your weapons away yet you jump to that conclusion every time this subject arises, on the defensive. September 10, 2019 at 3:18 pm UGH says: Like or Dislike: 2 1Any attempt at reasonable gun control is met with “they are trying to take away all the guns” because that is literally an NRA talking point that they give to the candidates that they back. They repeat it because they will lose their NRA A+ if they don’t. Then their sheep also repeat it, because baaaa, baaaa, baaaa… September 10, 2019 at 4:04 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 1 4UGH- What % of felons or (justice-involved person as California now calls them) obtain their guns and ammo over the counter at Walmart, gun shows, etc? September 10, 2019 at 5:23 pm UGH says: Like or Dislike: 4 0Jack – What percentage of the gun violence committed around the country can be attributed to legally obtained firearms? See I can ask questions without addressing your comments too… September 11, 2019 at 1:17 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 1 2UGH- If gun laws worked, wouldn’t the answer to my question be simple? 0%? What % of mass killings are committed in “Gun free” zones? Again, if gun laws worked, 0%. What % of mass killings are against the laws already on the books? 100% September 11, 2019 at 2:02 pm UGH... says: Like or Dislike: 2 1If guns laws worked….blah blah blah. They do work. You know how I know? See every other country in the world. The ones that have gun laws that don’t work, like Mexico, get there guns from…you guessed it, the good ol’ US of A. The fact is, a massive amount of gun violence is committed by people who legally obtained the gun they are using in the violent act. In other words, if they couldn’t legally obtain it, it’s POSSIBLE that a life could have been saved. I get it though, stricter background checks might mean you can’t get your precious guns. Which is obviously the most important thing. September 11, 2019 at 2:30 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 1 2UGH- Given mexicans have so many illegal guns, shouldn’t we close the border. September 11, 2019 at 2:32 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 1 2UGH- Ya know cause they bought them without back ground checks and metal health checks and they just keep coming in with their guns. You liberals crack me up. September 11, 2019 at 2:51 pm helpingout says: Like or Dislike: 2 1How blatantly racist of you Jack. I don’t know that Mexican immigrants legal and illegal are bringing weapons. Most legal and illegal immigrants are really fleeing countries that have been ravaged by wars (especially drug wars). They aren’t even Mexican, they are mostly from central america, but that just means they are Mexican right??? Most times they are fleeing gun violence that deal with….. American made guns that are smuggled into other countries by… American citizens. You want to say that we should look things up, but you being someone who is a bigot, racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and I don’t know what else, because the list is enough to show you should be one not taken seriously as you seem to be a person that is very uneducated that lacks common sense. September 11, 2019 at 3:46 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 1 2Helpingout- Mexican is not a race. God help us. September 11, 2019 at 4:27 pm helpingout says: Like or Dislike: 2 0Do you not understand that Mexicans are Latino/Hispanic right? Nice try on the semantics to try and protect your racist self, but a derogatory remark about Mexicans (which I am) is a racist remark toward Hispanics. Clearly there is a lot you understand. September 9, 2019 at 7:55 am Captain Planet says: Like or Dislike: 9 3Jack, what do you do when you see a guy in a hoodie armed with a bag of Skittles and a Gatorade? September 9, 2019 at 10:34 am Jack says: Like or Dislike: 2 7Captainplant- is he a good guy “armed” with a bag of skittles or a bad guy “armed” with a bag of skittles? September 9, 2019 at 2:20 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 0 4Cap plant- A. Are you too ignorant to realize people that carry are in just about every store you do shop in? B. I’ll still carry every day and every time I go into Walmart, if you were half as smart about guns and gun laws as you think you are, you would know how I do it legally. C. I don’t live my life in fear, I do live prepared. D. Why, I enjoy setting you snowflakes off. :) September 9, 2019 at 2:31 pm helpingout says: Like or Dislike: 3 0I mean that only means if you get caught openly carrying in a store, they will ask you to leave, and if you refuse they will then ask the cops to remove you from the premise. If it happens too many times, you will most likely be banned from those stores which you are blatantly ignoring their requests. Now conceal and carry is a different sign and they are not restricting that at all. “The Walmart statement noted that there was no change in regard to concealed-carry by customers with permits” All which is legal since they are a business and as you are not following their policies they can refuse to serve you as a client and can ask you to leave the premise. September 9, 2019 at 2:33 pm helpingout says: Like or Dislike: 4 0And do you mean the snowflakes setting you off as you got overly sensitive about the mental health screening test, being a called a bigot even though you showcased your bigotry, and then said someone would harm children in a tragic event which you have no knowledge of besides you are being overly sensitive to having your ideas challenged? September 9, 2019 at 3:02 pm Jon says: Like or Dislike: 3 0LOL and now you’re using the word “Retarded” as an insult. I guess you have shown once again the level of intelligence(lack of) that we’re dealing with. You’ve made claims to be vastly wealthy and run your own company etc. etc. which I highly doubt from what I’ve seen of your conversational skills LOL September 9, 2019 at 3:16 pm Captain Planet says: Like or Dislike: 3 0I don’t care if you own or carry a gun. All good by me. If that’s what you need in order to feel prepared or more compensated in some way, more power to you. Oh, and again for the record, I am an Independent. I leave the melting for the guy in The Oval who can’t seem to leave Alabama, John Legend, and his bride alone. What do you think of WalMart’s CEO’s decisions? September 9, 2019 at 4:00 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 1 1Cap- I think Walmart can decide what it wants. I’ll buy what I want and need elsewhere. It helps the local gun store owner actually. Criminals will get their ammo regardless of Walmart, etc. deciding not to sell it. Which is why, I’ll keep my guns and ammo, all of it! Tell Jon, might be June for all we know, I have to go now. I think the guys have it under control here in the office and I have some boating to do this eve. Cheers! September 9, 2019 at 4:04 pm Captain Planet says: Like or Dislike: 3 0OK, so you are going to boycott WalMart? I agree, they can decide what the rules for the customers entering their premises. Have fun boating, had a pretty good weekend of that myself. Going to have to close the lake house for the winter sometime relatively soon. Getting to be that time of year around here. Cheers back at you, I think I’m closing up shop for the day, too. September 10, 2019 at 3:18 pm HAHA says: Like or Dislike: 3 0Don’t act like it matters… September 10, 2019 at 4:51 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 0 3HAHA- notice I didn’t ask his race? September 10, 2019 at 5:01 pm Captain Planet says: Like or Dislike: 3 0The better thread was already taken down, unfortunately. Hoodie lives matter! September 11, 2019 at 3:20 pm Captain Planet says: Like or Dislike: 1 0Hey Jack, Reading comprehension, for the love of Pete. I never said that, but thanks for using a reference letting us all know who we are dealing with. Much appreciated. September 10, 2019 at 7:20 pm bob says: Like or Dislike: 0 4Patently absurd, yet again. Are you aware how tall this guy was? He definitely looked intimidating. I can wear a hoodie and have a bag of skittles. Chances are if you see me with my shaved head look, even when I was 17, you would have been nervous. You guys keep saying this as if to prove some universal anti black bias, which just doesn’t exist, or tons more black folks would be shot than there are. Instead, most black deaths still remain in the category of black on black crime, they aren’t being targeted by anyone other than possibly their own community. September 11, 2019 at 1:24 am Jon says: Like or Dislike: 5 2First, no one cares about your description or your blog, bub. Second, there’s not a universal anti black bias, there’s an American anti-black bias. It’s ingrained, societal, economical and institutional. Try talking to an actual black person instead of deciding you know their experience in this country. Let’s see your references, since now you are apparently an expert in black on black crime statistics. Yeah, that’s what I thought. You’re a product of the prior generation’s push for ignoring color. When you don’t see color, you’re ignoring racism. You’re looking at someone else and saying it doesn’t matter that they’re a different skin color, they have the same chance as I do in life. Except they don’t, and you’re now ignoring systemic racism. Try to actually read some of the wealth of literature available to you on the subject instead of deciding that as a white man you know everything. You obviously don’t. September 11, 2019 at 1:42 pm Captain Planet says: Like or Dislike: 1 0Interesting stats you note here, Jack. Is it their skin color that makes them do it or their socioeconomic status? Pray tell. September 11, 2019 at 2:50 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 0 1Cap Plant- I grew up in one of the poorest counties in SC. It’s still that way, 22% still live in poverty, median household income $38k, 38% Black. It’s country as country gets, EVERYONE has a gun. And guess what….it’s not the killing fields of Chicago…sell that crazy elsewhere. September 11, 2019 at 4:07 pm Confused says: Like or Dislike: 1 0so those black folks that commit 36% of violent crimes – that is just when both their parents are black, right? or is it also when there is one black parent but they come out more black than their white parent? September 11, 2019 at 4:28 pm Jack says: Like or Dislike: 0 1Confused- Was Obama the first black president or the first half white president? September 11, 2019 at 4:34 pm Boomers? says: Like or Dislike: 2 0I think it is more about how you classify it Jack as you have shown your racism on this thread rather than people who are pointing out your racism. If you can’t understand that simple fact you are a lost soul. Comment have been closed for this article.