C'mon Para. Kamala Harris said she'd erred by not getting out of DC more often. Gotta respect that humility.

This has fallen off the news feeds. Has anyone heard where the dude got the gun? Or who supplied it? He damn sure did not bring it over from the UK.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
This has fallen off the news feeds. Has anyone heard where the dude got the gun? Or who supplied it? He damn sure did not bring it over from the UK.

Gee, I can't understand why the MSM is no longer covering this.

/sarcasm mode off/

This current article has a timeline of his travels in the states but still no details on how he got the gun.

https://www.dallasnews.com/new...akers-time-in-texas/

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
Has anyone heard where the dude got the gun? Or who supplied it?

I heard on one new channel that he had purchased it from a homeless person but can't say if there's any truth to that or not.

Thanks for the added info. I did not find the articles in my search.
Great to know that our homeless shelters not only house terrorists but arm them too.
If that is actually how he got a gun.
I just did some math:
London UK to NYC air fare = $375. (one way since I would be martyred)
Greyhound Bus from NYC to TX = $150.
Cost of gun =? Homeless Shelter stay = free.
Motel room = Lets say $75 a night = $225.
So, if you are in Britain and want to come to Texas to take over a Synagogue your budget can be $800 to $1000. The Terrorism Economy Tour!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: YooperSigs,

I just did another search, there is still nothing definite about how he got the handgun.

However, I can guarantee the libs have their talking points revised and ready. Even if he found it in a dumpster, we can expect the usual demands for stricter gun laws. On the bright side, the libs not be as vocal as they want this event to disappear from the headlines.

Wouldn’t it be something if it was an unaccounted for weapon from Bagram.

Unless the media really pushes it, we’ll never know where the gun came from.

Because I promise you the gun has already been traced and the initial purchaser has got a visit.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
Unless the media really pushes it, we’ll never know where the gun came from.

Because I promise you the gun has already been traced and the initial purchaser has got a visit.

That doesn't mean anything. Once a gun has left the store (initial purchaser) there need be no further record of where and to whom it may have been transferred. No doubt there are some guns that have never been sold or given away, but I wouldn't count on it.

flashguy

Most states require an FFL to transfer any firearm. The FFL has to keep his records forever, or send them to the ATF. Now that everything is on computers, the police will be tracking down the last owners to learn who provided the gun.

This must have been arranged before he left from Britain on his personal jihad. If the serial numbers are still there, someone will soon be arrested.

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
Most states require an FFL to transfer any firearm.

Say what?

I’m completely aware of that. However, more often than not, if the time to crime is less than 500 days or so, you can have pretty good luck determining a pretty good idea of how the offender came into possession of the firearm.

None of that really matters though, because as I said unless they are pressured, they won’t release what they find.

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
Most states require an FFL to transfer any firearm. The FFL has to keep his records forever, or send them to the ATF. Now that everything is on computers, the police will be tracking down the last owners to learn who provided the gun.

This must have been arranged before he left from Britain on his personal jihad. If the serial numbers are still there, someone will soon be arrested.

Very few states require it. In most states,, person to person transfers are completely legal without going through an FFL.

The gov't failures in this story reek of political correctness strangling the apparatuses placed to protect the public from these nut jobs. Instead those apparatuses are focused on pudgy middle aged white men and soccer moms outraged their children are being taught bigotry and deviance by gov't employees.

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
Most states require an FFL to transfer any firearm.

Not true.

As of the most recent state-by-state breakdown I could find, the only states that require FFL transfers for in-state private sales are:

California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Maryland
Nevada
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Vermont
Virginia
Washington

That's only 15 out of 50, or 30% of all the states. Not "most".

(Technically 14.5 out of 50, because Pennsylvania only requires it for private handgun sales, not long guns.)

In PA long-guns may be transferred directly from from resident-to-resident as long as certain criteria are met (such as the buyer is not prohibited from owning firearms), but ALL handguns must be transferred through an FFL including those purchased from an out of state owner. Also, any firearms that are shipped into the state must be sent directly to an FFL.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
Most states require an FFL to transfer any firearm.

Not true.

As of the most recent state-by-state breakdown I could find, the only states that require FFL transfers for in-state private sales are:

California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Maryland
Nevada
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Vermont
Virginia
Washington

That's only 15 out of 50, or 30% of all the states. Not "most".

(Technically 14.5 out of 50, because Pennsylvania only requires it for private handgun sales, not long guns.)

Well, c1steve says his location is "West coast", and all 3 West coast states are on the list that require FFLs involved in private transfers--so he doesn't know any better.

Considering the states that do require it, it might be correct to say that a majority of the US population lives under those rules, though.

flashguy

video of 3 of the hostages escaping

https://twitter.com/i/status/1482584016796663809

At the beginning, two hostages come out together so it looks like only one person

note the guy at the top of the vehicle. He seems to be totally oblivious that the hostages just escaped

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by c1steve:
Most states require an FFL to transfer any firearm.

Not true.

As of the most recent state-by-state breakdown I could find, the only states that require FFL transfers for in-state private sales are:

California

Interesting fact: When I lived in CA 2003-2005 one could FTF a long gun older than 50 years. Not sure if CDOJ got that past of the code off of the books.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
video of 3 of the hostages escaping

Thank you.

Based on what little information I’ve seen about the incident, it seems that the group’s training was a significant factor in getting out unharmed. I get the impression that many gun guys who know little about such incidents believe that unless we are wearing a pistol on our hip at all times and have an AR or AK stashed in the corner, we’re not properly prepared to deal with a hostage situation, but just keeping our wits about us and taking advantage of opportunities can make a life or death difference. In my years of training and research about such situations I’ve been amazed how often hostages didn’t take advantage of chances to escape or resist effectively.