If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MyWay News)   Federal Law Enforcement Officials say the man accused in a shooting rampage at the Washington Navy Yard that left at least 12 people dead has been identified as Aaron Alexis, a 34 year-old man from Texas   (apnews.myway.com) divider line 896
    More: Followup, Washington Navy Yard, Washington, Texas, the man accused, officials, american patriots, long gun, federal  
•       •       •

10007 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Sep 2013 at 4:19 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



896 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-16 05:25:49 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: hundreddollarman: Atomic Spunk: [i1260.photobucket.com image 428x594]

RIP Alexis Texas

I got to meet her earlier this year. Got to grab DAT ASS.

/CSB.

O_O????  This won't get me anywhere, but the power of the FWC and/or maple vodak compels you to explain yourself!!  :D


She was the headline performer at a strip club in the SF Bay Area back in February. I rounded up some buds and we went. After her feature performance, we got to meet her in the VIP room. She was offering signed merch and you could take a Polaroid with her for $20. Got my photo snapped with my hand on DAT ASS. Best $20 spent ever.
 
2013-09-16 05:25:56 PM
A black Buddhist from Texas?  I don't think anyone had THAT on their mass shooting Bingo card.
 
2013-09-16 05:27:09 PM

shower_in_my_socks: Per Gawker: "A former friend described Alexis as a devout Buddhist. "

This will disappoint many people.


Especially devout Buddhists.
 
2013-09-16 05:27:28 PM
So what's the significance of him having a CCL in Texas? Or all you farkers arguing over misdemeanors, etc?
This happened in DC - I'm pretty sure a Texas CCL wouldn't be valid there anyway.
 
2013-09-16 05:27:46 PM

AngryDragon: Dedmon: mediablitz: Dedmon: EbolaNYC: Why is it that in these military installations no one has a weapon? There's no armed security at all?

WTF man.

Probably because it's a fact that guns cause more deaths from accidents/domestic fights than they do from stopping mass murders. The powers that be decide that it's a bad idea for even highly trained soldiers to have weapons 24/7 strapped to their sides.

And that this just isn't true. No PERSONAL weapons allowed. That's the tricky little "let's blame Clinton" that isn't mentioned.

Alright...they can't have a personal weapon strapped to their side...why? Because the powers that be decide that more people die from accidents and domestic arguments than from mass shootings.

And where exactly does Bill Clinton fit into this at all? And do you think the armory is open to any and all soldier who wants to carry a service weapon on base? It's not, the MPs will have theirs, while on duty, but even that gets checked in at end of the shift.

Among President Clinton's first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones.


Yes, banned from carrying personal firearms on base.
 
2013-09-16 05:28:14 PM

hasty ambush: whizbangthedirtfarmer:

What I can't understand is why a Black American male would feel the need to do this seeing how much that demographics  conditions have improved under this administration.


0/10
 
2013-09-16 05:28:24 PM

AngryDragon: PainfulItching: AngryDragon: Felgraf: AngryDragon: 
I never said it was Obama's fault or that GWB wasn't a retard.  I said it should be fixed.


The link you posted, last two sentences:

President Obama can end Mr. Clinton's folly and allow U.S. soldiers to protect themselves. Because we clearly cannot protect our soldiers from harm, the least we owe them is the right to protect themselves.

I know it's the first reference you could find on short notice, but if this stuff is going to be brought up now, just make really sure it's not going to be a biatch fest about how Obama isn't allowing troops to protect themselves. Don't even go there.
 
2013-09-16 05:29:38 PM

AngryDragon: Dedmon: mediablitz: Dedmon: EbolaNYC: Why is it that in these military installations no one has a weapon? There's no armed security at all?

WTF man.

Probably because it's a fact that guns cause more deaths from accidents/domestic fights than they do from stopping mass murders. The powers that be decide that it's a bad idea for even highly trained soldiers to have weapons 24/7 strapped to their sides.

And that this just isn't true. No PERSONAL weapons allowed. That's the tricky little "let's blame Clinton" that isn't mentioned.

Alright...they can't have a personal weapon strapped to their side...why? Because the powers that be decide that more people die from accidents and domestic arguments than from mass shootings.

And where exactly does Bill Clinton fit into this at all? And do you think the armory is open to any and all soldier who wants to carry a service weapon on base? It's not, the MPs will have theirs, while on duty, but even that gets checked in at end of the shift.

Among President Clinton's first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones.


As such a magnificent Internet Military Expert, have you offered your services to the Joint Chiefs of Staff yet? I'm sure they would much appreciate you explaining to them why they are so full of shiat for rationally evaluating a new regulation and deciding it was beneficial enough to keep for the last 20 years. Or you may just be a partisan asshole who only wants the regulation changed to score political points without the slightest interest in what the folk actually in charged of our base think about it.
 
2013-09-16 05:29:57 PM

AngryDragon: Haoie: Can't it be someone from the pinko states for once?

How?  Don't gun bans work?


I'm going to say this again for slow folks like you. Do you really think that if every motherfarker on that base was armed the shooters would have only used guns? If you do think that then you're as dumb as you appear.
 
2013-09-16 05:30:14 PM

LesserEvil: were sailors in utilities, but they at least seemed to have real weapons) - and I believe that base had nuclear weapons on hand.


If there were nukes there then there would have been Marines as the sentries. The nukes (if any) are actually kept up the river near Goose Creek at NWS Charleston where there is a MARDET.

As to people wondering why there were so few armed people around, it's a shipyard not a full blown base (nit that that would really matter as very few people are kept armed on bases stateside other than a very few sentries at fixed locations. NAVSEA is an engineering department although they do deal with designing and procuring weapons systems but there are no actually functioning weapons systems there. Ships offload any ordnance before they go into the yards and the shipyard takes joint ownership of the ship with most of the crew sent off to other commands. Essentially they end up with about a quarter of the crew staying behind to maintain security watches (sans weapons other than perhaps a nightstick), fire watches and to observe testing of repairs by the shipyard.
 
2013-09-16 05:30:24 PM

Isitoveryet: RedVentrue: WOW. A tragedy that plays into a lib political agenda? Whoda thunkit?

I know! why aren't there ever any abortion rampages!?


I bet if you check out planned parenthood the week after spring break.....
 
2013-09-16 05:30:56 PM
At least he wasn't using one of those scary lookin rifles. The victims would be so much more dead that way.
 
2013-09-16 05:31:06 PM
Has anyone said that this is not the time to talk about gun control.

Because I agree, this is not the proper time to talk about gun control.  It does not show any respect to the victims of this tragedy.

In fact I blame violent video games.
 
2013-09-16 05:31:08 PM

Obama's Reptiloid Master: RedVentrue: WOW. A tragedy that plays into a lib political agenda? Whoda thunkit?

This one knows too much, brotherssssss. Time to take him out.


By your command.
 
2013-09-16 05:31:24 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: So, this rarely happens so let's not change gun laws but have everyone carry and every electrician's mate at a military installation should be armed. Is that right?


Maybe if there was a provision for (quickly) opening up the armory in the event of an emergency, that would help stop events like this while still limiting the number of weapons being carried on-base 99.999% of the time?
 
2013-09-16 05:31:26 PM

nekom: A black Buddhist from Texas?  I don't think anyone had THAT on their mass shooting Bingo card.


I certainly didn't.

Though obviously, he's not much of a Buddhist.
 
2013-09-16 05:32:25 PM
Gentlemen, there will be no fighting in the war room!
I thought it was funny when i heard a radio commentator say they were looking for a man in tan clothes and a beret.

/How to hide inside the military-industrial complex made simple.
 
2013-09-16 05:32:33 PM

WhyteRaven74: badhatharry: Only the guys at the front gate are armed. Not a very good plan.

This point has already been made but most people in the military aren't trained in dealing with situations such as what happened today. Having a bunch of people walking around with weapons in case of a situation like this who aren't trained to deal with it could easily lead to it being worse.


It's idiotic to only have armed guards at the gate. If guns are banned, then they need armed on duty security guards in every building. It's a goddamned military base. It's like no guns in the police station.
 
2013-09-16 05:33:00 PM
The FBI is looking for more information about this deceased Texan, Aaron Alexis.  Can anyone help them out?


www.fbi.govwww.fbi.gov
 
2013-09-16 05:33:01 PM

AngryDragon: Among President Clinton's first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones.


How many people in the military are trained in the use of firearms for personal protection?
 
2013-09-16 05:33:03 PM

davidphogan: yelmrog: I'm sure there will be a flood of crap about how he's a left wing or right wing radical.

And the truth will probably be that he's neither.

You're probably right.


you're probably left!  Whaddayagonnadoaboutit?  You wanna go?!?  Let's go!  Right Now!!!  I'll go Ronald Regan on you!
 
2013-09-16 05:33:19 PM

Obscene_CNN: Seems like he entered the navy yard with a shot gun then "upgraded" his weapon by taking new ones from the people he killed.


That's impossible. From the other gun threads I have been told that guns can only be used as "self defense" by good guys not by "bad guys".

What you're trying to imply is bringing guns to a scene can actually make things worse and by doing so outing yourself as a commie pinko trader.
 
2013-09-16 05:34:25 PM

PainfulItching: AngryDragon: PainfulItching: AngryDragon: Felgraf: AngryDragon: 
I never said it was Obama's fault or that GWB wasn't a retard.  I said it should be fixed.

The link you posted, last two sentences:

President Obama can end Mr. Clinton's folly and allow U.S. soldiers to protect themselves. Because we clearly cannot protect our soldiers from harm, the least we owe them is the right to protect themselves.
I know it's the first reference you could find on short notice, but if this stuff is going to be brought up now, just make really sure it's not going to be a biatch fest about how Obama isn't allowing troops to protect themselves. Don't even go there.


I had no intention of doing that.  I'm simply stating that the personal weapons ban on military bases is bad policy and it is entirely political.  Obama can overturn that policy just as GWB could have.  I don't care who does it, just that it does get overturned.
 
2013-09-16 05:34:41 PM

FlashHarry: [si0.twimg.com image 500x500]RIP Art Alexakis


Hmm.  He does have the daddy issues that many killers do.  I think you may be on to something here.
 
2013-09-16 05:34:58 PM

Enemabag Jones: Has anyone said that this is not the time to talk about gun control.

Because I agree, this is not the proper time to talk about gun control.  It does not show any respect to the victims of this tragedy.

In fact I blame violent video games.


I blame crazy assholes who feel the need to hurt other people.
 
2013-09-16 05:35:04 PM
alicia-logic.com
Thank goodness he didn't ask about the little red button.
 
2013-09-16 05:35:17 PM

James10952001: At least he wasn't using one of those scary lookin rifles. The victims would be so much more dead that way.



i41.tinypic.com
 
2013-09-16 05:35:22 PM

WhyteRaven74: AngryDragon: Among President Clinton's first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones.

How many people in the military are trained in the use of firearms for personal protection?


The military could mandate that at the stroke of a pen.
 
2013-09-16 05:35:53 PM

plausdeny: The FBI is looking for more information about this deceased Texan, Aaron Alexis.  Can anyone help them out?


[www.fbi.gov image 109x128][www.fbi.gov image 101x128]


Did he use the same head-enfattening juice Barry Bonds used?
 
2013-09-16 05:35:56 PM

plausdeny: The FBI is looking for more information about this deceased Texan, Aaron Alexis.  Can anyone help them out?


[www.fbi.gov image 109x128][www.fbi.gov image 101x128]


Oh shiat!  He's black?!?!   Where's my popcorn!?!?  Thought for sure that was as white as white could be of a name... Is that racist?  Anyway.. this just became a clusterfark!!  Do the dems demonize him?  Do the repubs fight for his gun rights?!

Here come the head assplosions!!
 
2013-09-16 05:36:03 PM

jshine: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: So, this rarely happens so let's not change gun laws but have everyone carry and every electrician's mate at a military installation should be armed. Is that right?

Maybe if there was a provision for (quickly) opening up the armory in the event of an emergency, that would help stop events like this while still limiting the number of weapons being carried on-base 99.999% of the time?


I thought this was more of an office building They have an armory?
 
2013-09-16 05:36:22 PM

vrax: AngryDragon: Dedmon: mediablitz: Dedmon: EbolaNYC: Why is it that in these military installations no one has a weapon? There's no armed security at all?

WTF man.

Probably because it's a fact that guns cause more deaths from accidents/domestic fights than they do from stopping mass murders. The powers that be decide that it's a bad idea for even highly trained soldiers to have weapons 24/7 strapped to their sides.

And that this just isn't true. No PERSONAL weapons allowed. That's the tricky little "let's blame Clinton" that isn't mentioned.

Alright...they can't have a personal weapon strapped to their side...why? Because the powers that be decide that more people die from accidents and domestic arguments than from mass shootings.

And where exactly does Bill Clinton fit into this at all? And do you think the armory is open to any and all soldier who wants to carry a service weapon on base? It's not, the MPs will have theirs, while on duty, but even that gets checked in at end of the shift.

Among President Clinton's first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones.

Yes, banned from carrying personal firearms on base.


So...a gun-free zone.  Where most mass shootings occur.
 
2013-09-16 05:36:57 PM

plausdeny: The FBI is looking for more information about this deceased Texan, Aaron Alexis.  Can anyone help them out?


[www.fbi.gov image 109x128][www.fbi.gov image 101x128]


He's like a chameleon, able to change colors to match his surroundings
 
2013-09-16 05:37:34 PM

AngryDragon: The military could mandate that at the stroke of a pen.


The military could do all sorts of things. This does not however make them wise things to do.
 
2013-09-16 05:37:36 PM
Not only were at least two of the victims armed, but it sounds like one of them - a law enforcement officer with an AR rifle - had the shooter outgunned and was likely better trained. It didn't matter.
 
2013-09-16 05:37:53 PM

jshine: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: So, this rarely happens so let's not change gun laws but have everyone carry and every electrician's mate at a military installation should be armed. Is that right?

Maybe if there was a provision for (quickly) opening up the armory in the event of an emergency, that would help stop events like this while still limiting the number of weapons being carried on-base 99.999% of the time?


There probably is. For the MPs and officers, by order of the ranking officer on duty.

This keeps 200 uncoordinated responses from shooting each other, especially if, like today, the suspect(s) were wearing uniforms, or something that looked like uniforms. Or knowing who they were supposed to be shooting at. Remember how there were 3 suspect earlier, with just a vague description? Now there's one dead, and a person that the police want to talk to, but they don't have a name, just a description.
 
2013-09-16 05:38:18 PM
James10952001
Enemabag Jones: Has anyone said that this is not the time to talk about gun control.
Because I agree, this is not the proper time to talk about gun control. It does not show any respect to the victims of this tragedy.
In fact I blame violent video games.
I blame crazy assholes who feel the need to hurt other people.


Remember that last time that guy with a bunch of throwing knives went postal and killed like fifteen people.

Neither do I.

\I would be a hell of a movie scene.
 
2013-09-16 05:38:53 PM

Tat'dGreaser: AngryDragon: Because it was one of the first things Bill Clinton did when he assumed the Presidency, disarm soldiers on military bases.  Completely political.  It was never a problem before then.

Lulz whut? I've been in for awhile now and I don't remember anyone talking about the good old days when they could carry on base


When I was on a destroyer in 1985-86, we weren't allowed to carry KNIVES on the main naval base. Seriously, I almost had my working knife confiscated when I went over to the exchange; I talked him out of taking it because we were deploying the next day, and I had a chit to carry it on the ship as an E-3.

/Uncle Henry Bear Paw FTW.
//Deck ape.
 
2013-09-16 05:38:55 PM

AngryDragon: So...a gun-free zone. Where most mass shootings occur.


Places with armed guards are classified as gun-free zones now?
 
2013-09-16 05:39:15 PM
AngryDragon:
So...a gun-free zone.  Where most mass shootings occur.

I've noticed most of them occur on Planet Earth, committed by Earthlings.  Isn't that kinda weird?
 
2013-09-16 05:39:22 PM

AngryDragon: Among President Clinton's first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones.


WTF, this is just plain crazy.  Why isn't it a bigger deal?
 
2013-09-16 05:39:35 PM

shower_in_my_socks: Not only were at least two of the victims armed, but it sounds like one of them - a law enforcement officer with an AR rifle - had the shooter outgunned and was likely better trained. It didn't matter.


nope.  sometimes all the training and gear in the world can't help you.  sometimes the bad guys win.
 
2013-09-16 05:40:07 PM

someonelse: Places with armed guards are classified as gun-free zones now?


Sssh. These are the same idiots that still bring up Columbine as an example of why we need armed guards in schools.
 
2013-09-16 05:40:21 PM

FlashHarry: OhioKnight: Knew it! Buddhist!

Religion of peace, my ass!

Buddhist scum.

At least he's the first name in serial killers.

they've been mass murdering in burma for a while now.


Not a good time to be a Tamil in Sri Lanka right now either... Or a Muslim in Southern Thailand.
 
2013-09-16 05:40:38 PM

shower_in_my_socks: One man killed 12 people, just as the authors of the 2nd Amt intended. I eagerly await news of which well regulated militia he was member of so we can get to the bottom of this. The rest of the world thinks our gun laws and gun culture are crazy, and they are farking right.


*Europe
 
2013-09-16 05:41:15 PM

wambu: shower_in_my_socks: Per Gawker: "A former friend described Alexis as a devout Buddhist. "

This will disappoint many people.

Especially devout Buddhists.


They can contemplate the sound of one hand facepalming.
 
2013-09-16 05:41:59 PM

s2s2s2: shower_in_my_socks: One man killed 12 people, just as the authors of the 2nd Amt intended. I eagerly await news of which well regulated militia he was member of so we can get to the bottom of this. The rest of the world thinks our gun laws and gun culture are crazy, and they are farking right.

*Europe


Australia
Canada
Japan
 
2013-09-16 05:42:17 PM

plausdeny: The FBI is looking for more information about this deceased Texan, Aaron Alexis.  Can anyone help them out?


[www.fbi.gov image 109x128][www.fbi.gov image 101x128]


No one is suggesting those are two pictures of the same person, I hope.
 
2013-09-16 05:43:07 PM

minoridiot: mithras_angel: Ponzholio: minoridiot: FTFA:
 He is believed to have a criminal record there and to be a holder of a concealed carry weapon permit.

This should be impossible.  Texas does not issue a CHL to someone with a criminal record.

I'm not a lawyer, but he could be convicted of 200 misdemeanors and still get a conceal-carry permit so long as he has no felonies.

Not up on Texas CHLs, but if he had the CHL and then got a criminal record, how quickly does the CHL get revoked?

They would have sent him a letter revoking his permit after the conviction.


http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/RSD/CHL/faqs/

And here are the eligibility requirements for a CHL in Texas
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/GV/htm/GV.411.htm#411.172

If he had a criminal record, he did not have a CHL in Texas
 
2013-09-16 05:43:18 PM
So when do the Naval Yard Trutherstm start to come out of the woodwork?
 
Displayed 50 of 896 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report