Gun attack at Dallas police headquarters

[cronus]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-33121180

Gun attack at Dallas police headquarters

The police headquarters in the US city of Dallas, Texas, has come under attack by an unknown number of gunmen who opened fire on officers.
One suspect fled the scene in what was described as an armoured van and is involved in a standoff in a car park.

A number of bags were found outside the police HQ, at least one of which contained explosives including pipe bombs, police said on Twitter.
The motive for the attack is not clear. No officers have been hurt.

Dallas Police Chief David Brown quoted witnesses as saying that as many as four suspects were involved in the initial shooting incident at about 00:30 (05:30GMT) on Saturday. However, he said this hadn't been confirmed.
He said one suspect then fled the scene in the van, ramming a police car.

A police chase involving dozens of squad cars ended in a car park in Hutchins, about nine miles (14km) from central Dallas, and officers are negotiating with the occupant of the van, Mr Brown said.
The van has been disabled using a rifle, police said.

(continued)

[Seth]

And they blew out his engine block with a .50 Barrett and shot him dead right through the armored windshield. The right tool in the right place at the right time. Another dead terrorist.

[Tero]

He should have sent a toddler to do it, toddlers are easily talked into shooting with any easy gun.

[pcCoder]

What idiot really thinks they could have gotten out of this situation. Even if it would have been a better armored vehicle they could probably call in the local reserves and take it out with better military equipment, or just bring in a construction wrecking ball to crush the van or knock it over.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

YAY! Well-armed police managed to take out someone that should never have been judged fit to carry any kind of firearm in the first place! But checks on buying gnus is WRONG!!1!!

[JimC]

Their rights have been infringed! They were not permitted to own a tank!

[Svartalf]

Remember that after the civil war, private ownership of artillery guns was a done thing

[mistermack]

This obviously illustrates the need for citizens to be able to concealed-carry an anti-tank gun.

Then someone like Seth could have whipped out his enormous weapon and been a hero.

It's in the constitution.

By the way, what's so scientific about a loony with an armored car?

[Seth]

What idiot really thinks they could have gotten out of this situation. Even if it would have been a better armored vehicle they could probably call in the local reserves and take it out with better military equipment, or just bring in a construction wrecking ball to crush the van or knock it over.

Well, go look up Marvin Heemeyer sometime. They were in fact arming a Cobra with Hellfire anti-tank missiles at Buckley ANG base to take him out when he got stuck and shot himself.

It's a good thing terrorists, even the domestic kind, are relatively stupid.

[Seth]

YAY! Well-armed police managed to take out someone that should never have been judged fit to carry any kind of firearm in the first place! But checks on buying gnus is WRONG!!1!!

Er, problem is gun checks don't prevent criminals from buying guns because they don't buy guns from gun stores. Duh.

...or armored vans.

[Seth]

Their rights have been infringed! They were not permitted to own a tank!

Of course we're permitted to own a tank. You don't even have to go through a background check to own one. There are many privately owned tanks, armored cars and other military hardware, like howitzers, in private ownership in the US.

You do, however, have to pay a transfer tax and pass a background check to own a tank (or any other vehicle) with a main gun with a bore exceeding .50 caliber, plus a transfer tax for each round of ammunition. But it's still legal to own one.

[Seth]

Remember that after the civil war, private ownership of artillery guns was a done thing

Not to mention BEFORE the Civil War. In fact private ownership of artillery was not unusual even at the time of the founding of this nation. That's how Congress was able to issue letters of marque and reprisal to armed merchant ships to prosecute the war against Britain because the United States did not have a navy at that time and the revolutionary government relied upon the arms of private citizens (and captured British arms) to win the war against the tyrant Mad King George.

And that concept is why the 2nd Amendment exists.

[Seth]

This obviously illustrates the need for citizens to be able to concealed-carry an anti-tank gun.

Then someone like Seth could have whipped out his enormous weapon and been a hero.

It's in the constitution.

By the way, what's so scientific about a loony with an armored car?

If I want one, I can have one, if I can find one to buy and can afford it. That's the benefit of being a law-abiding citizen here.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

YAY! Well-armed police managed to take out someone that should never have been judged fit to carry any kind of firearm in the first place! But checks on buying gnus is WRONG!!1!!

Er, problem is gun checks don't prevent criminals from buying guns because they don't buy guns from gun stores. Duh.

...or armored vans.

No. But they might prevent people with a history of mental illness, spousal abuse, alcohol issues, etc. from getting hold of them. Not to mention those too stupid to keep their children away from the gnus in their handbags!

[Seth]

YAY! Well-armed police managed to take out someone that should never have been judged fit to carry any kind of firearm in the first place! But checks on buying gnus is WRONG!!1!!

Er, problem is gun checks don't prevent criminals from buying guns because they don't buy guns from gun stores. Duh.

...or armored vans.

No. But they might prevent people with a history of mental illness, spousal abuse, alcohol issues, etc. from getting hold of them. Not to mention those too stupid to keep their children away from the gnus in their handbags!

Um, evidently not, since this guy was prohibited from possessing guns or ammunition because of three domestic violence convictions already. You see, a history in any of the categories you mention already disqualify a person from possessing a gun in the US. It's been that way since 1968.