This hurts all of us.( 2 killed at Toys R Us in California)

imported post

You know that the media will fail to mention that there is no way that these people were not breaking the laws of the Peoples Republic of California just being armed. There is a good reason that this did not happen in Florida, or Texas. And by the way, I do carry when I go to Toys R Us, just like every where else that I go.

imported post

David817 wrote:

there is no way that these people were not breaking the laws of the Peoples Republic of California just being armed.

Click to expand...

Hey, last I checked California has better OC laws than Texas.

Although admittedly not by much. :X

imported post

You all are clearly missing the problem here. This whole thing started with 2 WOMEN getting into a fight in the store. Clearly the solution is to ban women from Toys-R-Us stores. Can't you all see how dangerous they are when in public? :banghead:

imported post

I don't think this event necessarily "hurts us all." It just requires us to step forward and address the prejudices some people are likely to use in manipulating the episode into an anti-gun opportunity.

As far as I know, two thugs shot each other with illegal guns. If any part of this basic summary is inaccurate, it still does not undermine my position on the right of self-defense. I expect that the situation might not have escalated as it had if more customers and some employees were openly armed.

I was saddened to hear how this episode played itself out in a children's store. How utterly disdainful.

imported post

Updated news articles are starting to come out about this. According to this one, it was the Southern California version of the Hatfields and McCoys!

ETA: Also, note the highlighted arrest records near the end of the article.

TFred

http://www.kesq.com/Global/story.asp?S=9440208&nav=menu191_2

TOYS 'R' US SHOOTING

EXCLUSIVE: Feud Shooting was a Murder-Suicide, Victim's Daughter Says

Posted: Dec 1, 2008 07:51 PM
By Nathan Baca
News Channel 3

There are still more questions than answers about what triggered a deadly shooting at the Toys 'R' Us in Palm Desert on Black Friday.

Police say Alejandro Moreno, 39, and Juan Meza, 28, both ended up shot dead inside the store. No one is under arrest and investigators aren't looking for any other suspects.

News Channel 3 talked to Alejandro Moreno's family to get their side of the shooting story.

Contrary to initial reports, the Moreno family says what happened inside the Toys 'R' Us is a murder-suicide. They say they witnessed Juan Meza shoot himself after killing Alex Moreno over a years-long family feud.

There were many witnesses and as many different versions of what happened inside the crowded toy store. None was closer than the daughter of Alex Moreno. The Moreno family wanted to conceal the teenager's identity. She was joined by in an exclusive interview Monday with Palm Springs attorney Mark Sullivan.

Alex Moreno's daughter recalls, "Right away, I saw Juan Meza pull out, partially pull out his weapon. That's when my mother said, 'he got's a gun, he got's a gun!.' After that, I heard around four shots fired from Juan Meza, and right there, I seen my dad drop. That's the worst thing... watch my dad die... to watch your dad die in front of you."

Moreno's daughter continued, "And then I told Juan Meza because he was alive, looking like 'what did I do?' He was just staring at my dad, like 'I killed him.' And then I tell him, 'you killed my dad, is this what you want? You killed my dad. You killed him, You did it.' And then I go look at my dad and I hear one or two shots, and right there, he killed himself."

Deputies have surveillance tape from Toys 'R' Us. They will not say if the video confirms the Moreno family's account. The coroner's bureau did the autopsies of the two men Monday.

Moreno's family added Alex Moreno carried a gun everywhere he went to protect his family from the long-running grudge Juan Meza and his brothers had against their family. Moreno did not have a license to carry a concealed weapon. Alex Moreno's wife wasn't clear on how the grudge started. She stated off-camera that it had come to the point that Moreno feared going out in public in fear of being confronted by the Meza family.

"He threatened our family, and then my cousins and everybody. He did so many things. My dad never did once nothing," said Moreno's daughter.

The arrest records for both men tell far different stories. Moreno of Cathedral City had one 1998 arrest for domestic violence. But Meza of Desert Hot Springs had multiple convictions for gun possession, assault with a deadly weapon and drug charges. Despite numerous convictions, Meza apparently did not serve any prison time.

Palm Springs attorney Mark Sullivan has a theory.

"I suspect that Juan Meza was a criminal and an informant for the police. The reason I say that is because the judges who sentenced him on all these cases are not lenient judges. They're very tough sentencing judges here in Indio, as they all are. None of the judges nowadays tolerate weapons possessions, especially repeat offenders who have never been to prison a day in their life."

Stay tuned to News Channel 3 and KESQ.com as we follow the ongoing investigation into the tragic shooting on Black Friday.

imported post

Sounds like two fine, upstanding, law abiding, legal gun carrying citizens, huh?

Wait a second, I meant two prior felons, illegally carrying weapons, and probably illegal aliens with no right to be in this country in the first place, endangering the lives of innocent people Christmas shopping with their innocent children.

imported post

ItsMyRight2Carry wrote:

Sounds like two fine, upstanding, law abiding, legal gun carrying citizens, huh?

Wait a second, I meant two prior felons, illegally carrying weapons, and probably illegal aliens with no right to be in this country in the first place, endangering the lives of innocent people Christmas shopping with their innocent children.

Click to expand...

Dont' know about that...Domestic violence is a felony? I am pretty sure it is not.

It sounds to me that Meza may have been a shady character but Moreno seems less of one. All he really had was, from what it says a DV arrest? No conviction?? Come on. . . That is nothing like multiple convictions for gun possession, assault with a deadly weapon and drug charges.

imported post

You're right, one bad guy and one good guy...With a previous domestic violence arrest (no mention of a conviction or not) illegally carrying a concealed firearm, probably in the country illegally (but that's just speculation on my part).

imported post

Who cares if he is in the country illegally...doesn't he also have the right to protection?

imported post

"Who cares if he's in the country illegally?" OMG, are you serious? WOW...Have you taken the time to read any statistics on illegal aliens and violence. Being that you live in California, I'm sure you're well aware of the problem this country faces as it relates to immigration control. I'm astounded that you would make a comment like that, unless you, yourself are here illegally also.

I care if he's in this country illegally when he's in a toy store, illegally carrying a firearm, in hopes of defending himself from another illegal alien thug.

Assuming they are illegal aliens, had they been kept out of this country in the first place, they wouldn't have put hundreds of innocent people's lives in danger in the middle of a toy store on the busiest shopping day of the year!!

Statements like yours are the reason this country has become overwhelmed with this very problem...

If you want to read some disturbing statistics regarding illegal aliens in our country just Google crime statistics of illegal aliens. They're astonishing...

http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecentersffec

Read this, and maybe you'll understand why Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a fiscal emergency Monday and called lawmakers into a special session to address California's $11.2 billion deficit.

imported post

I didnt see anythingeven closely related the fact that either of the two men had permits. Did I miss something?

imported post

Theseus wrote:

Who cares if he is in the country illegally...doesn't he also have the right to protection?

Click to expand...

You cant be serious with this reply!

imported post

Thank you, Titan, I'm appalled at that comment...

You're correct, it only states:

"Moreno's family added Alex Moreno carried a gun everywhere he went to protect his family from the long-running grudge Juan Meza and his brothers had against their family. Moreno did not have a license to carry a concealed weapon."

imported post

The 2nd amendment recognizes a preexisting human right to self-defense through the bearing of arms. No government has the right to nullify this right, regardless of immigration status.

We may choose to restrict immigration into this country, and to restrict government services to citizens and/or legal residents, but we may not infringe upon a fundamental human right.

If we don't wish to allow them here, then we can deport them. We still may not infringe upon their human rights.

If we may infringe upon one human right, where do we draw the line? What prevents us from simply enslaving illegals, if they have no human rights?

If you don't like it, well, freedom can be scary. What else can I say?

Besides, there are solutions to these problems that don't require disarming innocents.

imported post

marshaul wrote:

SNIP If you don't like it, well, freedom can be scary. What else can I say?

Besides, there are solutions to these problems that don't require disarming innocents.

Click to expand...

+10

imported post

In general, non-immigrant aliens are forbidden to possess any firearms or ammunition. But there is a big exception for a legal alien who:
...is in possession of a hunting license or permit lawfully issued in the United States

(See Title 18, USC Chapter 44, Section 922, part (2) for details.)

Green-card holders and immigrant aliens who do not yet have their green card are both okay under federal law, although many people (including gun dealers, law enforcement officers, etc.) are not aware of the distinction or the hunting license exception, and erroneously think that either you have a green card, or you can't have guns.
Also, non-citizen cannot purchase a firearm from a federally licensed firerams dealer unless they have been a resident of their state for 90 days. So, no, tourists on short visits cannot walk into guns stores to get "protection" during their trip.


I'm not sure about CA, but North Carolina only issues concealed weapon permits to citizens. See NCGS 14-415.12.



By the way, +100 for: "Besides, there are solutions to these problems that don't require disarming innocents."

imported post

ItsMyRight2Carry wrote:

http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_immigrationissuecentersffec

Read this, and maybe you'll understand why Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a fiscal emergency Monday and called lawmakers into a special session to address California's $11.2 billion deficit.

Click to expand...

Oh please, what a load of unmitigated BS. This whole article presents a series of strawmen, making unrelated points and concluding with the ever-annoying "immigration is expensive!" whine.

Let's see, where do we start?

This analysis looks specifically at the costs to the state for education, health care and incarceration resulting from illegal immigration. These three are the largest cost areas, and they are the same three areas analyzed in a 1994 study conducted by the Urban Institute, which provides a useful baseline for comparison ten years later.

Click to expand...

So, as I said, they've addressed a bunch of completely unrelated topics, and come to the conclusion that immigration is "costing us money".

education

Click to expand...

Strawman. The state should not be paying for education for anybody. What about the fact that the state of California is going into bankruptcy paying for all the legal residents who get socialized schooling? The problem is public schooling, not illegals.

health care

Click to expand...

Strawman. The state should not pay for healthcare in the first place. Once again, the problem already existed with healthcare; you don't get to blame it on illegals.

incarceration

Click to expand...

Also a strawman, but for a different reason. For starters, "illegals", being illegal, are legally allowed to do less and thus are more likely to end up incarcerated for noncriminal (as in, no act of aggression) violations. More importantly, our entire justice system is focused on punishing the innocent and "rehabilitating" the guilty. Many illegals are involved in drugs. Legalize drugs, and you take away easy profits (forcing them to work) and eliminate half our prison populations (of both legals and illegals). If our justice system dealt with crime instead of arbitrary violations of regulation, illegals criminals could be dealt with in stride along with citizen criminals.

Finally, as for actual violence caused by illegals, it's disproportionate compared to citizens as a whole, but right in line with the demographics that make up the membership of legally resident gangs. The common denominator? Gangs and drugs. Gang culture feeds on the profits created by the prohibition of drugs. This is a problem that exists outside of just illegals. Eliminate those profits, and watch gang violence wither away, amongst legals and illegals alike.

imported post

"Oh please, what a load of unmitigated BS. This whole article presents a series of strawmen, making unrelated points and concluding with the ever-annoying "immigration is expensive!" whine."

So, your whole argument is that illegal immigration has little, if any, financial impact on our education, healthcare, and judicial system? What cave are you living in?

"For starters, "illegals", being illegal, are legally allowed to do less and thus are more likely to end up incarcerated for noncriminal (as in, no act of aggression) violations."

Allowed to do less? It seems to me that they do what they want. I don't see anyone following them around saying "Uh oh, you're not allowed to do that!" The fact that they're here illegally shouldn't allow them to do anything other than turning around and heading back to where they're from!

"Legalize drugs, and you take away easy profits (forcing them to work) and eliminate half our prison populations (of both legals and illegals). If our justice system dealt with crime instead of arbitrary violations of regulation, illegals criminals could be dealt with in stride along with citizen criminals."

I agree with you here. There are WAY too many non-violent drug offenders either going through the judicial process, or incarcerated, costing this country billions of unnecessary dollars.

"Finally, as for actual violence caused by illegals, it's disproportionate compared to citizens as a whole, but right in line with legally resident gangsters."

I would have to disagree with this statement. I would like to see you back this up with some statistics. Drunk driving (although not considered a violent crime) is a MAJOR problem with illegal mexicans here in NC.

imported post

IMR2C: Your name amuses me when you are arguing against the right to carry. As marshaul said, it's a fundamental human right to defend oneself. Immigrant or not, illegally in this country or not, we recognize the right to keep and bear arms as a fundamental right.

Conflating the issue with the financial implications of illegal immigration is just throwing out a red herring, one that you don't even address well. Consider that, for every illegal immigrant you see using these services, there are hundreds if not thousands who pay taxes using false social security cards. Taxes they could/would likely get refunds on as legal workers. I think people get a bit too bent out of shape about the word "illegal", focusing on the fact something is not currently legal and not the reasons why that situation exists.

The truth is that the law isn't perfect, as open carriers we recognize this in our efforts to help reshape it to something better in states that would deny our rights. The fact that the law is imperfect, though, doesn't change its legality. Nor should we throw up our hands when something is illegal and say "that's the law" - if the law is bad, we fight it to make it better. Have you ever considered that many of those who are trying to emigrate here would love to do it legally, but the law doesn't allow them? Does it make their desire for freedom wrong, the desire to work in a place with opportunity to support a family they love immoral? I say that you would be immoral for denying them that basic right - to life, liberty, and the pursuit of property.

I think the problem is less "illegal aliens" and more "people who violate the life and liberty of their fellow man." I don't care if you've lived here your whole life or sneaked across the border last night, you're still a human of human value until you act in a manner that says otherwise. I'm not willing to prejudge you before giving you a chance, the same way that I hope any person meeting an OCer on the street shouldn't prejudge them, in my opinion.

Perhaps it's because of where I grew up (about 2 miles from where this incident took place, in Palm Desert), but I have a lot of sympathy for the plight of the "illegal immigrant." Many (most) are just honest, hardworking people who try to escape a place with a grim future for them and theirs. Lumping in the trash thugs is like saying that all white people who live here legally are going to shoot up a high school (Columbine), bomb a building (Unabomber) or otherwise act in a violent and horrific manner. It makes no sense.

imported post

ItsMyRight2Carry wrote:

So, your whole argument is that illegal immigration has little, if any, financial impact on our education, healthcare, and judicial system?  What cave are you living in?

Click to expand...

No, that wasn't my argument. It's clear illegal immigrations has definite impact on those things, but that's entirely irrelevant. The problem isn't whether recipients are "legal" or "illegal", the problem is that the state pays for this stuff at all.

$10.5 billion is a small fraction of what California spends on education, healthcare, and prisons. Thus, even without illegals we'd still be going through a budget crisis. Also, if the government didn't provide these services at all, illegals couldn't use them. Therefore, the illegals are a distraction from the bigger problem at hand, which is that government is inefficiently spending our money on education and healthcare, and wasting it on needless incarceration of innocent folks.

It's a strawman for the same reason: the problem is expensive, inefficient socialized education, yet you blame illegals; expensive, inefficient socialized healthcare, yet you blame illegals; expensive and illegal imprisonment of innocents, yet you blame illegals. These things are done to illegals, so you can't really blame them any more than you can blame Americans who similarly cost the government money.

So, when you boil it down, the only expense you can really make a justified gripe about is when they commit violent crimes or other acts of aggression, the punishment for which must be payed for by the American taxpayer.

And I've attempted to address the issue of (most) of the crimes that actually qualify as acts of aggression already...

ItsMyRight2Carry wrote:

Allowed to do less?  It seems to me that they do what they want.  I don't see anyone following them around saying "Uh oh, you're not allowed to do that!"  The fact that they're here illegally shouldn't allow them to do anything other than turning around and heading back to where they're from!

Click to expand...

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I just meant that illegals sometimes go to jail for things that aren't actually acts of aggression; i.e. malum prohibitum offenses which are attributable at least in part to their illegal immigrant status itself.

However, this wasn't intended to be the crux of my argument.

ItsMyRight2Carry wrote:

I would have to disagree with this statement.  I would like to see you back this up with some statistics.  Drunk driving is a MAJOR problem with illegal mexicans here in NC.

Click to expand...

I don't disbelieve this, but that's not really what I meant by "violence", although I'll grant that drunk driving can certainly have violent results.

And as far as the drunk driving goes, I can't help but wondering if having legal status might not help to foster a budding sense of responsibility (with regards to society at large) in at least some immigrants. I'm not trying to justify anything, but I can't imagine that one feels too responsible towards a society that doesn't even legally recognize his presence. I'm sure there is a cultural element to it, but that doesn't mean that they can't or won't adapt.

Edit: And anyway, I bet drunk driving is also equally a problem amongst black gansters. Or at least, it is if their music is any indication. :uhoh: