Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Friday, Feb. 1, 2013 | 2:01 a.m.
I found the column by Joe Nocera, “Last week’s gun news,” very interesting. No one argues that people kill others with guns. Unfortunately, it happens too frequently in this country. Are more restrictions the answer? Not if you use New York City as an example. The article stated that the city broke a nine-day murder-free streak last week. Nine days murder-free doesn’t sound that long to me, especially when you consider that, since 1911, New York state has some of the most restrictive gun control laws. It is almost impossible for anyone in New York City to obtain a license ...
Chicago, New York, and Washington DC have proven gun control is not working
New York's situation just proves that we need gun laws on a national level rather than a city or state level. You can't have effective gun control in New York and not have it in Virginia or North Carolina. The disparity in gun laws between jurisdictions just establishes a black market that might make guns more expensive but doesn't make them unavailable.
"we need gun laws on a national level" @ Jim Weber
The assault weapons ban was FEDERAL. It went into effect in 1994 and expired 2004. When it expired and until now, it was not renewed. Since 2004, gun violence and crime rates have gone done nationally compared to the period 1994-2004 with the FEDERAL assault weapons ban.
CarmineD
"we need gun laws on a national level" @ Jim Weber
We have gun laws at the national level whats your point? Existing Gun laws are not enforced by Obama.
-
National Firearms Act of 1938
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968
Gun Control Act of 1968, primary federal law regulating firearms. It prohibits all convicted felons, drug users and the mentally ill from buying or possessing guns; and the licensing requirements for gun dealers and requires detailed record-keeping.
Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986. The law bans civilian ownership of machine guns manufactured after May 19, 1986. Weapons made and registered before that date are not affected.
The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 mandates background checks of gun buyers. Checks occur through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), maintained by the FBI. By 2012 Eighteen years after the Brady law is passed, 156 million background check have been performed under the law. The number of gun sales rejected through federal denials reaches nearly a million.
Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 produces a 10-year federal ban on the manufacture of new semi-automatic assault weapons. The law specifies 19 weapons that have the features of assault weapons. The act also bans large-capacity ammunition magazines, limiting them to 10 rounds.
The law does not apply to weapons that were already in legal possession, and there are easy ways to adapt new weapons to avoid the prohibitions. The 10-year sunset provision of the assault weapons ban runs its course.
2008 - The Supreme Court in the District of Columbia v. Heller holds that Americans have an individual right under the Second Amendment to possess firearms in federal enclaves "for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
Correlation is not causation Carmine. Prove the link.
Meanwhile,
How many millions of people live in the NYC area? Nine days without a murder. Not bad and a step in the right direction no matter how disparaging the uninformed letter is.
In reply to Jack Oliver; you just might be right, that we need another solution, and the answer may be quite chancy.
PART ONE
It is an extremely gloomy scenario for our people of the United States to know that hopelessness may very well become the norm and that the rash of public mass-murdering scenes and family murder-suicides are only going to greatly increase in our gun crazed and violent American society. Without doubt, in America's past, we have had a virtual lack of gun control. What were Americans thinking?
But, there is more. During the presidential regime of Ronald Reagan, our national network of treating mental illnesses was dismantled. What were Americans thinking?
But, there is still more. Our lives, for the most part here in America, have been extremely stressed out and paranoid both economically and emotionally ever since the 911 attacks were carried out on America. Coupled with all the subsequent threats that have been propagated by Al-Qaeda and other international terrorist organizations, America has fought two decade long wars with little or nothing to show for any type of added security for its people. What were Americans thinking?
But still, there is more. And, it gets worse. Because, the truth is, there is now "no security" of any kind for Americans. This is most likely the widest ranging and scariest state that can possibly be put in the face of those who have known democracy and freedom for so long. So, what are many of these Americans thinking now? Quite simply, as a final solution, an increasing percentage of Americans who are of both the Christian faith and the non-faith element, have come to believe in "a madness of suicide and murder."
It is true that many more Americans will be facing some type of desperateness in their future. This violent run of mass-murders and murder-suicides will not end. Nor, will it subside. The evidence is clear, suicide is what a good share of Americans has come to see as their ultimate solution. And, no one is exempt from its consequences. And, most of all, sadly, not even innocent family members or others of a community are spared.
So, what do we do?
PART TWO
VICISSITUDES NOT ATTITUDES
B.A Rogers wrote, "Legalizing Assisted Suicide; Is Being Dead Really Better?" Well, none of us know the answer to this. However, I tend to believe if we passed "assisted suicide laws" and have mobile community "Assisted Suicide Stations" that are operated and managed by government certified physicians; we could significantly cut down the killings of innocent community and family members that are committed by all these crazed gunmen.
It is fact that many of these mass-murderers and those that commit family murder-suicides want to make a final statement. This is easily verifiable by the final punishing act they commit.
I'm of the opinion that every adult American should have the absolute freedom of choice to take their own life-ending option of assisted suicide by a licensed physician with guarantees of, as Mr. Rogers's terms, "Death with Dignity".
These-type laws would be based on the premise that legalizing assisted suicide alleviates a person's suffering, no matter whether it be for chronic health problems, mental, legal, emotional, financial or any other situation that would bring an individual to ultimately bring forth the reality of them carrying out atrocious acts of armed violence against blameless people in our society.
In these cases, to only have one death; the one who desires suicide as an end result, I would say that their death with dignity is really not only good for them, but better for those of us in America who is lucky enough to still have our heads screwed on right.
"Those who would give up some liberty for some security deserve neither." (I paraphrase.) I am amazed at those thoughtless wimps who see no harm in ceding their rights to unelected, unaccountable, pencil-pushing, bureaucratic drones. Yes, some leftist legislator may push through an onerous bill limiting our rights, but it will be some bureaucratic gnome who will "enforce" it and, along the way, add his/her own interpretation of how it is to be enforced and what means he/she can use. Just because there are nutcases out there using guns, knives, bats or boulders to commit crimes and/or murder does not justify diminishing the Constitutional rights of the rest of us. You don't want guns, knives, bats or boulders in your household? Fine by me. I don't care if you put a neon sign in your window announcing that to the world. Just don't tell me what I can or cannot have to defend my household, my wife and myself from those bent on doing us harm. If I want a .22, .25, .38, or one of "Dirty Harry's" larger toys, that's my business and my right. You? Butt out!
If New York State has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the country.Why is it that it didn't
seem to apply to convicted killer William Spangler of Webster N. Y. who killed his 92 year old grandmother with a hammer years earlier?
Killer Spengler was able to purchase a mossberg shotgun and 38 caliber pistol and a bushmaster assault fifle thru fraud.He killed 4 including himself and wounded 2 others with an assault rifle.
I believe all the talk is about banning assault rifles with large clip holders for ammunition.It appears that New York state does not have a ban on assault rifles which seems to be the weapon of choice in the last 4 or so mass murders in recent months in our country.
lvfacts101 - "I am amazed at those thoughtless wimps who see no harm in ceding their rights to unelected, unaccountable, pencil-pushing, bureaucratic drones."
Did you complain when Bush issued the Patriot Act? That law is far more detrimental to your rights than any gun law.
Here is a fact to digest. More Americans have died from gun violence than died in all the wars we engaged in, from the American Revolution to our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Jack Oliver, Las Vegas,
You must work for the NRA, or holed up in one room with limited contact to real-time information.
The Sun posted your comments knowing your not accurate in order to generate a discussion about guns. This is good. This is acceptable.
Still, Jack, your way off the mark with your assessment. Not in real time. Your living in the Ed Koch era.
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/nycr...
Jack needs to look at the statistics. In the 1980s and 1990s they had thousands of murders in New York City. Most would guns. In 2011 had just over 770.
I wish the country would begin to routinely compile and report gun deaths. Every day, in every newscast, we should report the number of Americans whose lives have been robbed by firearms. I would also like to see a national clock, similar to our debt clock, that ticks off each death for a running total. And let's not forget to ask Wayne LaPierre to comment on each of the nation's senseless gun deaths.
Gun control is NOT the issue. Was all of this happening in the 50s? No. Why?
"Correlation is not causation Carmine. Prove the link." @ Mark Schaffer
Really?
Legal gun sales increased by over 100 percent since the FEDERAL assault weapons ban expired and gun crime and violence is decreasing ever since every year, year over year. Is this a consequence of just random coincidence? Then, what is the cause/effect evidence used by people who are anti-gun rights to support FEDERAL gun/magazine bans?
CarmineD
It's curious that we launched two wars to avenge the deaths of 3000 Americans due to airplanes used as bombs and as a result have lost 6500 more Americans and tens of thousands have traumatic injuires. Yet, we lose 13,000 people to gun murders EVERY YEAR.
So we get bodily searched to get on a plane to prevent a repeat. But background checks on all gun buyers and the use of statistics to find straw buyers who give legally purchased guns to criminals is taboo. In 1999, Wayne LaPierre was in favor of background checks on all gun transactions.
What if the terrorists had launched a coordinated attack on America and killed 3,000 Americans with semi-automatic scary-looking guns they bought through straw men? Would we be arguing over this?
Gerry, ALL forms of crime decreased in NYC.
To use Mark's tactic, how is an almost 6-fold drop in Burglaries (360K in 1980 to 65K in 2011) attributable to gun control?
Now that IS Correlation, without Causation.
Here are 2 articles in today's R/J about the possibility of control we could look forward to if the whackos on the hard left took over: In Iceland, the government has a strict policy on what YOU may name YOUR child. It took a court to overrule the denial of the name "Blaer" which a couple chose for their daughter. In Somalia, a woman raped by security forces was charged with insulting a government body, inducing false evidence, simulating a criminal offense and making a false accusation. She faces imprisonment up to 3 & 6 years if convicted. A journalist who reported the crime is also charged with insulting a government body & inducing the woman to give false evidence. He faces up to 4 years for the first charge and 2 years for the second. Those governmental actions are eeriely similar to some of those proposed by both letter writers and commentors in rants to the LV Sun. In the first, they express the belief that government must control even the smallest aspects of our lives. In the second, they'd make it a crime to express an opinion which did not agree with their agenda. They are very dangerous to our way of life and must be kept at bay.
+1 m schaffer.
Not True.
We have a Nevada statute that illegals are prohibited from gun possession. That's not working and not being enforced. We still have illegals killing Americans on our streets whenever they want "rent money." And so then we give them public defenders, at our expense, and try them in our courts, at our expense. Then we incarcerate them at our expense.
As usual, I see the almost carbon copy commentaries of gun control and gun owner advocates. Meanwhile, the slaughters of the innocent people continue in America with the presumed and or the literally insane having a "murder festival" within our borders.
It's too late for gun control. The flood gates have way too long been opened for that. The gun enthusiasts are not going to lose their rights to their weapons. Common sense should tell each of you this is constitutionally guaranteed, and there are just far too many weapons in the hands of owners and in circulation to ever reverse course now.
We need solutions!!! We need change!!! Wake up!!! Look at these statistics!!! Quit the damn bickering! Quit the damn stupid debates!
Every day, 270 people in America, on average are shot in senseless murders, assaults, suicides, accidents, and police intervention. Every day, 87 people die from gun violence.
So what does the average American do? Besides voicing their opinions on more guns, or more gun control laws, America sits back and waits, truly in fear. The thought crosses every reasonable mind that when a family member leaves the dwelling for basically any purpose, we wonder if this is the last time we will ever see our loved ones alive. Is this the way Americans now want to live their lives? Do we call this freedom? Is this the new America? Should we settle for this?
Do you think my two part commentaries at 6:49 AM were that absurd in relation to death with dignity assisted suicides? If so, then let me put a pure fact in your face. For nearly three decades I've dealt with the mentally ill who are incarcerated, and also with the homeless on periodic occasions, in the city streets. One thing is true of the majority. Most remember clearly, from their pasts, the reason and the point at where their lives spun out of control with little chance of recovery. I have little doubt that any more than a few, of all those afflicted, would have rejected, at this hopeless, but early stage, a "Death with Dignity Assisted Suicide".
Most of us know the whys and wherefores that lead people towards these violent behaviors and outbursts of violence with guns. Medical professionals, such as psychologists, who study mental processes and human behaviors by observing, interpreting, treating and recording, know all too well, behind closed doors, that in progressed stages of hopelessness, most people's mental state at some point in this process is only going to deteriorate and spiral downwards towards an assimilation of an animal acting out of control with the final stages of the rabies disease.
Maybe this isn't the right idea that I've proposed. But, one thing is for sure, the talks of constitutional rights and gun control just leave innocent Americans every day as "sitting' ducks" waiting for the armed lunatics in our society to end their lives.
It sure seems that the left leaning folks would like to create a utopia of no guns at all. Reasoning that is not possible they will settle for grabbing selected guns from those who acquire them to protect themselves from bad guys who will always manage to obtain and use these guns against the good guys. Of course this is an unrealistic policy,also unconstitutional, which will not be legislated into existence. More intelligent, the People will push back and ultimately preserve the Second Amendment rights of all citizens as they are commonly understood.
BChap,
I fully agree with your thoughts on assisted suicide. I posted a couple of weeks ago that part of the solution might be to remove the stigma attached to suicide in this country and allow people who wish to do so to end their lives with dignity rather than feel they must make a statement. (I believe that the taking of one's own life is the ultimate act of a free person and to say such a thing is "illegal" as some states do is absurd.)
I also think that the mass-marketing of anti-depressants and other drugs that carry warnings about suicidal thoughts is a major contributor to the problem of gun violence, at least in cases involving family and/or friends. As much as I detest some of the philosophical implications, I would not oppose a background check that includes current or recent use of such drugs and having such appear be a reason for denial of a gun permit. (That said, I can't help but wonder how many people who take Xanax would be better off by smoking a joint.)
"We need a better solution to this awful heritage."
Oliver -- as if any of this is a surprise. Our country is nearly 2-1/2 CENTURIES old, and recorded human history is thousands of years, yet posters in these Discussions write as if predatory violence is something new.
"New York's situation just proves that we need gun laws on a national level rather than a city or state level. You can't have effective gun control in New York and not have it in Virginia or North Carolina."
pisces -- this country was not founded to be centrally governed, and the federal Constitution doesn't allow it. That's why our republic is named The UNITED STATES of America.
"I am amazed at those thoughtless wimps who see no harm in ceding their rights to unelected, unaccountable, pencil-pushing, bureaucratic drones."
lvfacts -- or thugs with badges, or just under color of authority. Yet that's what the herd clammers for, no? Seems German history from the last century repeats itself here.
"If New York State has some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the country.Why is it that it didn't
seem to apply to convicted killer William Spangler of Webster N. Y. . ."
samspeaks -- either you can't read or don't know the difference between New York City and New York state.
"You must work for the NRA, or holed up in one room with limited contact to real-time information."
Longtimevegan -- chill, LTV. Oliver's letter made some good points worth paying attention to.
"The only thing new in the world is the history you don't know." -- President Harry Truman on the insight "Plutarch's Lives" gave him
Assemblyman Brooks is a perfect example. Allegations of threats to take human lives have been made by not only Brook's fellow politicians, but his family members, as well.
Assemblyman Brooks should not have been released from the custody and care of mental health professionals until the police investigation of these subject allegations cleared Mr. Brooks. In other words, no bail for those under investigation for issuing threats against anothers life. However, should there have been sufficient probable cause that Assemblyman Brooks made these threats against human life; Mr. Brooks should have remained in the custody and care of mental health professionals until such time as appropriate charges have been filed, and court appearances, trials, and resolutions have been rendered.
In my world of opinions and recommendations, mental health professionals should offer people who are convicted of, or at entering stages of extreme violence, "Death with Dignity Assisted Suicide" Should the subject refuse this service, for the safety of our society, it should be made clear in partnership by the courts and mental health professionals that release from mental health custody back into society will not be granted at any time in the near future, if any freedoms are ever recommended to the court by mental health professionals.
In America, threats of committing acts of murder against others should be dealt with harshly. Too many innocent lives have been taken in preserving what many Americans feel are their right to make blanket threats against others. Although the accused and convicted do have rights, it should not be at the risk and expense of innocent people in our society. This change in America is long overdue.
Many of the problems we have in enforcing existing laws is self-inflicted. Did the 1994 measure work? Who knows! At the behest of the NRA Congress allowed collecting the necessary data only during the first year. And at the behest of the NRA Congress refused to extend it. Do we have an epidemic of gun-related crime? Who knows! At the behest of the NRA Congress prohibited the people who deal with epidemics (CDC) from addressing that question.
Does gun control in New York have an impact on New York gun-related crime? Who knows! New York (City or State) has no authority to control its boarders. ANYONE can bring in guns from ANYWHERE - in any volume! Do the background checks do any good? Who knows! At the behest of the NRA Congress required that the data be destroyed within 24 hours. Can we enforce the penalties for falsifying background check data? No! Again, at the behest of the NRA Congress requires the data be destroyed within 24 hours.
Can we trace a firearm used in a crime to the original seller? Not reasonably nor on a timely basis! At the behest of the NRA Congress prohibited that data from being computerized so any attempt to search it requires sifting through reams of paper. Do all sellers keep uniform records? Absolutely not! At the behest of the NRA Congress refused to establish uniform record-keeping: some records are hand-written on rolls of paper towels! I've not heard of a seller using toilet paper - yet. Can we determine if a specific dealer routinely sells guns to unauthorized purchasers? Absolutely not! At the behest of the NRA Congress. . . Etc. Etc. Etc.
Just exactly who votes for these Congress Critters, anyhow? We, the People? Or the NRA? These results clearly show the answer - the NRA does, of course. And we get the best Congress money can buy.
"In other words, no bail for those under investigation for issuing threats against anothers life. "
In other words, presumed innocent unless someone says you threatened someone, then it is up to mental health professionals, not judges, to grant you your freedom again.
Bradley's world sounds alot like countries where speaking against the party gets you life or death or worse.
In reply to "Boftx"; I'm actually quite surprised that anyone agreed with my views on assisted suicides.
When it comes to psychotropic medications, I've known more than a few mental health inmates who were on these mind-altering drugs. Even the inmate, himself, expressed his fears to me about these medications and what would happen should these drugs not be available to him once out of prison.
They were right, once paroled or expired from their sentence; the end for these mental health patients, who were former inmates, was not pretty. The worst part of all this was their victims. These innocent people never had a chance.
BChap,
Religious people tend to think of suicide as a "sin." I will speculate and say that liberals who have a negative view of suicide do so on grounds that there is always a way to help someone no matter how bad things might seem.
There are other cultures than ours, and some of them see suicide as the honorable, indeed the *only* right thing to do in some cases. This has been true throughout history in diverse cultures.
Still others see it as regrettable, but understandable and accepted. We should move to at least that category.
I simply don't know if having a more tolerant view of suicide would help prevent murder-suicides, but it certainly couldn't hurt.
On a side-note, keeping a person alive against their will could possibly be the worst punishment of all. We might very well have things backwards. We should be assisting those who wish to die (WHETHER OR NOT WE THINK THEY HAVE REASON) to do and reserving forced life to those who have been sentenced to life without parole.
I have a hard time with suicide, but that also depends on why a person wants to end their life. If someone is suffering in terrible pain with no hope of recovery and waiting to die, even being a Catholic I can understand why they want to end their life. My biggest issues are with people who want to end their life for things like financial problems or broken relationships and then on top of that decide they need to take innocent people with them as has been the trend here in town lately. If someone feels that bad and sees no other alternative at least leave others out of the equation. I've had to put dogs to sleep to avoind suffering from medical issues, so I understand that people don't want to live in pain. Me, I'm an optimist, i want to hang around to the bitter end.
"Gun bans don't disarm criminals, gun bans attract them." -- Walter Mondale
: {
Jack.......
Gun control may never be perfect but it's much
better than no gun control.
The first and easiest thing we need to do is
start a new ban on assault rifles and mega clips.
We do not want to live in a country with idiots
running around with assault rifles.
Those kids and teachers would be alive today if
republicans left the assault rifle ban in place.
BChap......
Maybe we need a new Dr. Kervorkian.
The letter is NOT CREDIBLE
From Mayor Boomberg's YOUTUBE channel
"Mayor Bloomberg Announces 2012 Sets All-Time Record for Fewest Murders" http://youtu.be/8yX1WFhLk4g
Carmine fails to understand my question. Not surprising.
KillerB,
Inaccurate information is consider making a good point?
Hummm....Okay... At best this generates an additional discussion on guns. A meaningful debates requires honest and accurate information. Jack Oliver falls short of accurate information.
Don't confuse good points with inaccurate information. Jack Oliver made a point, it was not good.
"We do not want to live in a country with idiots
running around with assault rifles." @ Teamster
No not true. We don't want to arm just some of the idiots and not others.
CarmineD
"Carmine fails to understand my question. Not surprising." @ Mark Schaffer
I suggest you go back and read your post to me. It doesn't have a question in it, except perhaps buried in the recesses of your mind. Sadly, I never had that course in mind reading.
CarmineD
ByKillerB
"Samspeaks,Either you can't read or don't know the difference between New York City and New York State".
Either you can't read or you never finished reading Mr.Oliver's letter to the editor to it's very end.Mr Oliver clearly writes in his letter to the editor that "NEW YORK STATE has some of the most restritive gun control laws in the country".It dosen't say city it says state.
My suggestion to you would be read the whole article before trying to make false comments about others who clearly "STATE" what was written by Mr Oliver.
Jeraldo has an idea. Authorize law enforcement to stop, frisk and confiscate when they have reasonable suspicion, something less than reasonable cause. When a city or area has a violent crime rate above, say the national average, authorize a little more search and seizure. What might be unreasonable in a safe quiet neighborhood SHOULD BE allowed and REQUIRED in crime-ridden areas. No need to increase funding--just allow the cops to do their jobs with a little less red tape and "judicial oversight."
samspeaks (sam pizzo) said " Either you can't read or you never finished reading Mr.Oliver's letter to the editor to it's very end.Mr Oliver clearly writes in his letter to the editor that "NEW YORK STATE....
My suggestion to you would be read the whole article before trying to make false comments about others who clearly "STATE" what was written by Mr Oliver. "
hey 'samspeaks' The letter is titled " Gun control is not working in NYC "
The Article says "Are more restrictions the answer? Not if you use New York City as an example"
The letter and 'samspeaks' is NOT CREDIBLE
From Mayor Boomberg's YOUTUBE channel
"Mayor Bloomberg Announces 2012 Sets All-Time Record for FEWEST Murders"
http://youtu.be/8yX1WFhLk4g
Byboogiefinger,
I commented on Mr. Oliver's statement about "NEW YORK STATE GUN LAWS", as it was spelled out in his the letter to the editor.Perhaps you should read what was said. Mr.
Oliver's words not mine.
samspeaks <- but can't read
samspeaks says "I commented on Mr. Oliver's statement about "NEW YORK STATE GUN LAWS", as it was spelled out in his the letter to the editor.Perhaps you should read what was said. Mr.
Oliver's words not mine."
FROM THE HEADLINE and LETTER:
Headline:
"Gun control is not working in NYC"
NYC, as in NEW York City
"Are more restrictions the answer? Not if you use New York City as an example. The article stated that the city broke a nine-day murder-free streak last week."
New York City, as in a City in New York
"It is almost impossible for anyone in New York City to obtain a license to carry a concealed weapon, and yet this city has always had one of the highest murder rates in the country"
New York City, a City with the fewest murders since 1961 according to the Mayor of New York City. Which is a City, in New York.
http://youtu.be/fYb2JJSKZBg?hd=1
Byboogiefinger,
New York City Is a part of New York State all state laws apply to all residents of the state.
Time for you to find another arguement somewhere else.We are done talking.
Let Jack Oliver look at it from another angle.New York City' population is MORE THAN 4 times that of the "entire" state of Nevada.8,244,910 to 589,317 in Las Vegas (only). New York State has a total population of 19 1/2 MILLION to our 2.7 MILLION for the entire state of Nevada. Our murders and shootings here are some of the WORSE in the entire country for its population and NO ONE but NO ONE can argue that !!
Anyone here have better training than this guy?
http://www.star-telegram.com/2013/02/02/...
"Chris Kyle, a retired Navy SEAL and the U.S. military's most lethal sniper, was fatally shot Saturday along with another man on the gun range of Rough Creek Lodge, a posh resort just west of Glen Rose, Erath County Sheriff Tommy Bryant said.
A suspect was arrested about five hours later in Lancaster, southeast of Dallas, more than 70 miles from the scene, Bryant said.
The suspect, identified as Eddie Ray Routh, 25, was pursued to a house in Lancaster by officers, including a local SWAT team. Routh tried to flee in a vehicle but was stopped about 9 p.m. after spikes were laid across a road, Bryant said.
"The suspect has been caught and is in custody in Lancaster," he said. Erath County sheriff's investigators and Texas Rangers were securing a capital murder warrant, he said.
Witnesses told sheriff's investigators that the gunman opened fire on the two men around 3:30 p.m., then fled in a pickup belonging to one of the victims. The Sheriff's Department didn't get a call until around 6 p.m."
Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2013/02/02/...
"Anyone here have better training than this guy?"
And your point?
He was a former Navy Seal Sniper not a mind reader!
Bloomberg announces 2012 Record LOW Murder Rate
http://youtu.be/fYb2JJSKZBg
The Letter is a complete fabrication.