Gun Control & RKBA

eridani

(51,907 posts) Wed Jun 17, 2015, 05:37 PM Jun 2015

Open Carry 'advocate' guns down woman who complained of sexual harassment.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/14/1393260/-Open-Carry-advocate-guns-down-woman-who-complained-of-sexual-harassment

Did I say advocate? I meant nutjob.

An Iowa mall cop — with a Facebook account loaded with open-carry and right-wing memes and photos of multiple weapons — is under arrest for shooting and killing a fellow mall worker because she filed sexual harassment complaints against him.

- - -

KCJJ reports that a cousin of Farrington’s said that Kozak had been harassing the victim for at least six weeks and that she had complained to his superiors about unwanted advances he had made toward her.

So he shoots her 3 times in the back.

She was 20 years old.

It's hard to get away from the glaring appearance that the more rabid and foamy-mouthed a person is about their goddamned Second Amendment rights, the more prudent it is to keep an eye on them or monitor your boundaries/relationships with them.

And I am NOT Talking about "the run of the mill" gun owner/enthusiast. I'm not going to post them here, but at the link above you can see his 'facebook posters' and while I am as vociferous about the 1st Amendment as any gun nut is about the Second, I suggest these sorts of poster/memes thin out the pool of whom authorities - who spy on us anyway - might want to keep an eye on for real.

And really, since we are all still under the specter of piss testing to keep our jobs, how is it that a woman can complain numerous times about a gun-toting employee making unwanted sexual advances without anything being done? What's more important?

17 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Open Carry 'advocate' guns down woman who complained of sexual harassment. (Original Post) eridani Jun 2015 OP

Hmm... beevul Jun 2015 #1

Too busy HassleCat Jun 2015 #2

Wow!!!! GGJohn Jun 2015 #11

Not sure HassleCat Jun 2015 #12

Ok, thanks for clarifying that, GGJohn Jun 2015 #13

Another reminder of why my wife and I both carry. ileus Jun 2015 #3

Right, if only the victim had been armed.... louis-t Jun 2015 #4

That sounds pretty awful Shamash Jun 2015 #8

Lots of mind-reading you have going there n/t arcane1 Jun 2015 #9

Okay, you tell me what the commenter was implying Shamash Jun 2015 #10

Pssst, it's OK, that's what they do. louis-t Jun 2015 #17

They won't stop you from getting shot in the back. arcane1 Jun 2015 #5

Nothing's 100% discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2015 #6

Rule #26 discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2015 #7

many people might not be so "foamy-mouthed about their goddamned Second Amendment rights" the band leader Jun 2015 #14

The absence of guns would not have altered his mindset. He's still a murderer. Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2015 #15

Noticed a lot of foamy-mouthed stuff in your OP. Eleanors38 Jun 2015 #16

beevul

(12,194 posts)

1. Hmm...

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 05:45 PM

Jun 2015

It's hard to get away from the glaring appearance that the more rabid and foamy-mouthed a person is about their goddamned Second Amendment rights, the more prudent it is to keep an eye on them or monitor your boundaries/relationships with them.

I'd say the same thing about facebook users in general. I seem to recall a militant atheist facebook user and some others.

Then again:

"Social networking sites like Facebook have become part and parcel of our everyday lives and it's important to stress that there is nothing inherently bad about them. Facebook is no more to blame for these homicides than a knife is to blame for a stabbing – it's the intentions of the people using these tools that we need to focus upon."

http://www.bcu.ac.uk/news-events/news/six-faces-of-killers-on-facebook-revealed

I'd say that applies.

On edit:

And really, since we are all still under the specter of piss testing to keep our jobs, how is it that a woman can complain numerous times about a gun-toting employee making unwanted sexual advances without anything being done? What's more important?

Clearly there was a fail in the process, far far before the gun became an issue.

HassleCat

(6,409 posts)

2. Too busy

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 05:46 PM

Jun 2015

The NSA, FBI, etc. could use their spying apparatus to monitor the activities of 2nd Amendment advocates, but they're too busy stalking ex-wives and ex-girlfriends. I guess we're on our own.

GGJohn

(9,951 posts)

11. Wow!!!!

Reply to HassleCat (Reply #2)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 07:26 PM

Jun 2015

You want the Intelligence services of this country to monitor 2A advocates like me?
You sure you're on the right board?

HassleCat

(6,409 posts)

12. Not sure

Reply to GGJohn (Reply #11)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 07:36 PM

Jun 2015

There are people, such as my own pitiful self, who support the2nd Amendment because it's part of the constitution, and I swore to uphold and defend that. Plus, I realize the right to keep and bear arms is not unconditional... But, wait! There are people who think it is unconditional, unlike any other constitutional right, that scaring the crap out of their fellow citizens with open carry stunts and similar hijinks is "defending the constitution." Remember the film Taxi Driver? When he's standing in front of the mirror, asking his reflection, "You talkin' to me?" Those guys. Yeah. If law enforcement authorities have legitimate probable cause to keep an eye on them, yes.

GGJohn

(9,951 posts)

13. Ok, thanks for clarifying that,

Reply to HassleCat (Reply #12)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 07:42 PM

Jun 2015

I'm a strong proponent of the 2A, but I'm not one of those that believes that there can't be reasonable restrictions.
I take issue with those that open carry and flaunt it, they're not doing 2A advocates like me any favors and are portraying gun owners in a negative light.

ileus

(15,396 posts)

3. Another reminder of why my wife and I both carry.

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 05:48 PM

Jun 2015

This is the kind of thing that happens when you depend on paper for defense.

louis-t

(23,295 posts)

4. Right, if only the victim had been armed....

Reply to ileus (Reply #3)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 05:57 PM

Jun 2015

that way while he was shooting her in the back, she could have....wait.....

Shamash

(597 posts)

8. That sounds pretty awful

Reply to louis-t (Reply #4)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 06:48 PM

Jun 2015

You seem to be suggesting that since being armed (in any way) was pointless, she should just accept her fate and not even have a choice to have a means to protect herself.

Did you feel the same way about that woman in New Jersey who was stabbed to death? Do you feel it was in the best interest of her and society in general to be denied her choice to protect herself?

Having that means at hand is no guarantee of safety or survival, but my personal belief is that it is not your choice to make for someone else.

If you have pro-choice attitude towards women's rights, that is.

arcane1

(38,613 posts)

9. Lots of mind-reading you have going there n/t

Reply to Shamash (Reply #8)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 07:13 PM

Jun 2015

Shamash

(597 posts)

10. Okay, you tell me what the commenter was implying

Reply to arcane1 (Reply #9)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 07:19 PM

Jun 2015

Because if you can't provide an alternative, you really have no basis to critique my interpretation, now do you?

louis-t

(23,295 posts)

17. Pssst, it's OK, that's what they do.

Reply to arcane1 (Reply #9)

Thu Jun 18, 2015, 02:57 PM

Jun 2015

You know, open up the machine gun mouth and spew a bunch of nonsense. Smarter people don't throw out everything in their trick bag all at once, though.

arcane1

(38,613 posts)

5. They won't stop you from getting shot in the back.

Reply to ileus (Reply #3)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 06:20 PM

Jun 2015

Reagan has Secret Service guards and carried a concealed gun with him. He got shot anyway.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,479 posts)

6. Nothing's 100%

Reply to arcane1 (Reply #5)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 06:38 PM

Jun 2015

That's why only firemen are allowed to carry fire extinguishers.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,479 posts)

7. Rule #26

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 06:40 PM

Jun 2015

"Your number one Option for Personal Security is a lifelong commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation."

the band leader

(139 posts)

14. many people might not be so "foamy-mouthed about their goddamned Second Amendment rights"

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 08:28 PM

Jun 2015

if there weren't so many god damned foamy mouthed people intent on denying them their second amendment rights.

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)

15. The absence of guns would not have altered his mindset. He's still a murderer.

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 10:13 PM

Jun 2015

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)

16. Noticed a lot of foamy-mouthed stuff in your OP.

Reply to eridani (Original post)

Thu Jun 18, 2015, 01:28 PM

Jun 2015

You do realize that such language usually results in more than ample push back, defeats for progressives, and a de-grading of reasonable discussion here on DU?

Nothing to gain, a lot to lose.

Reply to this discussion