Joining the show with full coverage on the San Bernardino mass shooting are Craig Melvin, Richard Lui, Kerry Sanders, Nicolle Wallace, Shawn Henry, Trymaine Lee, Rep. Jim Himes, Nick Confessore, Clint Van Zandt, Eugene O’Donnell, Pete Williams, Sen. Tim Kaine, Rep. Mac Thornberry, Andrea Mitchell, Grant Whitus, Sam Stein, Carly Fiorina, Frank Fiorina, Sara Eisen, Speaker Paul Ryan and more.
14 killed in San Bernardino, Calif., mass shooting; 2 gunmen dead following high-speed police chase. Suspects were wearing tactical gear, carrying assault rifles, police say.
What we know so far:
- At least 14 people were killed and 17 others injured in a shooting at the InlandRegional Center in San Bernardino, Calif., Wednesday.
- Two shooters opened fire inside the facility — which serves people with developmental disabilities — and fled in a dark SUV, police said.
- Hours later, an SUV matching the description led police on high-speed chase during which shots were fired at police.
- Two suspects — 28-year-old Syed Rizwan Farook and 27-year-old Tashfeen Malik —were killed during the police pursuit. Both were wearing tactical gear and carryingassault rifles and handguns. The pair are believed to have been married or engaged.
- Farook, a county employee, became angry and left a party at the Inland Regional Center, police said.
- No motive was immediately released, but officials have not ruled out terrorism.
- One officer was wounded and transported to a local hospital with non-life-threatening injuries.
- Another person, a male who was seen leaving the area, was taken into custody. It's unclear if that person was involved in the shooting earlier in the day.
- The shooters were armed with long guns and were wearing what appeared to be ski masks and vests, witnesses said.
- “These were people who came prepared,” San Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan told reporters. “They came in with a purpose, with an intent to do something.”
- Burguan added: “We have no information at this point to indicate that this is terrorist-related, in the traditional sense that people may be thinking. Obviously, at a minimum, we have a domestic-terrorist-type situation.”
- A suspicious device left at the center is "believed to be an explosive device," he said.
- Officials are searching an apartment in Redlands, Calif., in a raid related to therampage.
- President Obama called for stricter gun control in the wake of the shootings.
- It is believed to be the deadliest mass shooting in the United States since Sandy Hook.
SB County Sheriff
@sbcountysheriff
@sbcountysheriff
.@SBPDChief will do his next press conference ref the shooting in#SanBernardino tomorrow morning at 9:00am Waterman/ Vanderbilt
SB County Sheriff
@sbcountysheriff
@sbcountysheriff
.@SBPDChief just concluded the press conference. Updates will be provided as they become available.
SB County Sheriff
@sbcountysheriff
@sbcountysheriff
Rest assured we are doing everything we can to make sure the public is safe. Fed., state, county and local agencies are all working together
SB County Sheriff
@sbcountysheriff
@sbcountysheriff
"Devices that we felt were explosives in the building were disposed of"@SBPDChief
SB County Sheriff
@sbcountysheriff
@sbcountysheriff
Syed Rizwan Farook was a San Bernardino County employee. The relationship between the two susp. not confirmed. Could be wife, gf etc.
SB County Sheriff
@sbcountysheriff
@sbcountysheriff
The press conference is underway. @SBPDChief confirmed the deceased suspects as Syed Rizwan Farook (DOB 6/14/87)&Tashfeen Malik(DOB 7/13/86)
San Bernardino shooters die battling police. It started at a holiday party -- perhaps with a slight or a testy exchange, something that prompted Syed Rizwan Farook to storm off angrily.
It ended in a bloodbath with 14 people dead and 17 more wounded -- the deadliest mass shooting in the United States since Sandy Hook.
At its center, a couple, Farook and Tashfeen Malik.
Dressed in black, carrying semi-automatic rifles, they unleashed a massacre Wednesday at the Inland Regional Center, a facility for the developmentally disabled in San Bernardino, California.
That was their first brazen act. Then they led police on a chase. Farook fired while Malik drove.
They died in a hail of bullets when they tried to take on 21 officers.
Now comes the challenging part: What was their motive? Surely it couldn't just have been anger at a party. The level of attention speaks to something much more meticulously planned.
Police don't yet know.
The husband and wife didn't leave behind a note at Inland Regional. But they did stash three explosive devices -- rigged to a remote-controlled toy car -- that didn't go off.
The mass shooting
It was around 11:00 a.m. when Farook and Malik opened fire.
A text message landed in Terry Pettit's phone from his daughter, who was inside Inland Regional.
"Shooting at my work. People shot," she wrote. "Pray for us. I am locked in an office."
Denise Peraza was also inside the center when she was shot in the back. She called her sister Stephanie Baldwin, thinking it might be time to say goodbye.
"As soon as the gunfire started, everyone dropped to the floor and they were underneath desks, and she was trying to shield herself with a chair, along with a man next to her," Baldwin told CNN affiliate KABC. "Then, all of a sudden, she said she just felt (the bullet) going through her back."
"I just want to tell you that I love you," Peraza told Stephanie Baldwin over the phone through tears.
Peraza survived. She is in a hospital and is expected to recover.
Police have not released the names of those who died.
Within minutes, troops of officers stormed the building searching for an active shooter. They counted the dead -- and shuttled the wounded out to triage.
"We had to come out with our hands up and be escorted across the street to the golf course," a woman who works at the center told KCAL/KCBS.
"We stood there for hours, hours witnessing clothing of deceased ones on the street, people crying, co-workers crying, us wanting to get to our children."
SUV shootout
But Farook and Malik slipped away in a black SUV.
Not for long. Acting on information that quickly pointed police to Farook, they went to his home in Redlands with a search warrant.
The shooting occurred at the Inland Regional Center (1) in San Bernardino, California. Two suspects were shot and killed by police in a residential area (2) about two miles away hours after the initial incident.
A black SUV drove by them. Slowly at first, then it sped away.
A police car took up pursuit, as the SUV raced back in the direction of San Bernardino. While Malik drove, Farook opened fire out of the vehicle.
Some 21 officers returned fire. When the SUV came to a halt, it was riddled with bullet holes. The couple inside was dead; their bodies found dressed in "assault-style clothing," San Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan said. "Dark kind of tactical gear."
One officer was wounded, but his injuries were not life-threatening, Burguan said.
In the chaos, police encountered a third person who was running away. "We do not know if they were involved," Burguan said. "We have that person detained."
But they feel confident that there were only two shooters -- Farook and Malik.
This is notable given that, while there have been many mass shootings, it's extremely rare when they involve more than one shooter. Only two of the 28 deadliest shootings since 1949 in the United States have had more than one shooter.
Guns galore
Two .223 caliber rifles were in the car with them, along with two pistols.
They were legally purchased, police said.
Two handguns traced back to Farook, an official said. He bought them three to four years ago.
Someone else bought the two rifles, possibly a former roommate -- also legally three or four years ago. That person isn't believed to have anything to do with the shootings, the official said.
© Mapbox © OpenStreetMap Improve this map
"I think that what we have seen and how they were equipped, there had to be some kind of planning in this," Burguan said.
Explosive devices
Back at Inland Regional, there was still danger to be dealt with -- three explosives the pair had left behind.
They were "pipe bomb type design," Burguan said. Police secured them and remotely detonated them.
The explosives had been rigged to a remote control for a toy car, an official said. That remote was found inside the SUV. And in the vehicle was another pipe-like device, but it was not an explosive, Burguan said.
In Redlands, officers sent in a robot to check Farook's residence, which they held surrounded into the night.
San Bernardino Shooting: Suspects Left Baby Daughter With Grandma.
A couple who died in a hail of bullets after allegedly killing 14 people during a Christmas party at a state-run center for people with developmental disabilities left their six-month-old daughter with her grandmother before the onslaught.
U.S.-born Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, and wife Tashfeen Malik, 27, were killed in a shootout with police more than four hours after the rampage at the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California, on Wednesday.
Farook had been at the party before the shooting and left "under some circumstances that were described as angry," San Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan told reporters Wednesday night. Farook worked as a health inspector for the county health department for five years.
However, authorities would not rule out terrorism as a motive. Farook and Malik were wearing tactical gear and armed with assault-style rifles when they were killed, Burguan said, adding "there had to be some degree of planning."
Authorities said an "explosive device" was found inside the building during a secondary sweep. Two of their four guns had been bought legally, sources told NBC News.
Between 10 and 30 minutes passed from when Farook left the party and the shooting began, according to Burguan.
"These people came prepared to do what they did as if they were on a mission," Burguan said. "They were armed with long guns, not with handguns."
Burguan said investigators knew little about Malik or "where she is from."
Law enforcement sources told NBC News that the couple had traveled to Saudi Arabia and may have even met there.
Seventeen other people were wounded — at least 10 of them were listed in critical condition early Thursday. A police officer was injured in the shootout.
Farhan Khan told NBC News that his brother-in-law Farook and wife left their baby girl with with Farook's mother on Wednesday, claiming they they had a doctor's appointment. The grandparents first became worried when they got a call from the media at around 2 p.m. asking if they knew Farook was a suspect in the shooting, according to Khan, who is married to Farook's sister.
"I just cannot express how sad I am for what happened today," Khan said at a press conference held by the Muslim advocacy group the Council on American-Islamic Relations Wednesday night. "I am in shock that something like this could happen."
Khan said he had spoke to Farook a week ago, adding: "Why would he do something like this?" He added that Farook and Malik had been married for about two years.
The shooting at the Inland Regional Center occurred at around 11 a.m. Police said the two barged into a conference room during a Christmas party for San Bernardino County employees and opened fire before fleeing in a black SUV. Whent he shooting ended, occupants in the building were told by police to exit with their arms in the air.
Farook and Malik were killed after police checking a lead in the nearby town of Redlands began chasing a vehicle believed to be related to the incident, Burguan said. The pursuit led back to San Bernardino, where the deadly shootout occurred.
A third person was later detained but it was unclear early Thursday whether they had any role in the attacks.
A profile under the user name "farooksyed49" on dating website iMilap.com featured a picture of Farook that Khan confirmed was his brother-in-law. It stated that the user was Muslim American and born in Chicago, Illinois.
"Farooksyed49" described himself as a Muslim American citizen looking for marriage who lives in "California/riverside" — a community about 11 miles south of San Bernardino. His age on the site is listed as 22. IMilap.com describes itself as a "Site for People with Disabilities and Second Marriage."
The user said he was from a "religious but modern family" and listed "Eastern and Western Mix" under family values.
"Enjoy working on vintage and modern cars, read religious books, enjoy eating out sometimes travel and just hang out in back yard doing target practice with younger sister and friends," according to the profile.
NBC News could not immediately confirm whether the dating profile belonged to the suspect.
San Bernardino Mayor Carey Davis told TODAY's Matt Lauer of his "shock" at the events.
"The priority has been public safety. Our police department responded as effectively and safely as they could," he said. "We need to stay on a high level of alert but at the same time we can't be paralyzed by these instances."
Salihin Kondoker, whose wife was shot during the rampage, told TODAY that his son first learned of her involvement when a friend saw television pictures of her being treated at a local hospital.
Kondoker said she was recovering from gun wounds to her right arm.
"She's doing remarkably well," he said. "She said bullets were flying all over the place. She corralled herself into the bathroom but realized her hands were bleeding."
He added: "Any killing of a human being should be an act of terrorism. I think we need to control our gun law in this country. No matter what, any killing of any human being is an act of terrorism."
Relative of suspect ‘in shock’ over San Bernardino shooting that left 14 dead. Two suspects in the massacre at a Southern California social services center Wednesday that left 14 dead and 17 injured were killed in a shootout with police, authorities say.
Police Chief Jarrod Burguan said said a man and a woman were killed after officers chased them down.
According to NBC, multiple law enforcement sources identified one of the attackers at the resource center as Syed Rizwan Farook. The Los Angeles Times identified Farook as a 28-year-old American citizen.
Late Wednesday, Burguan identified the second suspect as Tashfeen Malik, 27. Police did not know where Malik was born or where she had lived.
According to the Los Angeles Times, Burguan said police are “reasonably confident” Farook and Malik were the same two people who opened fire at the holiday party Wednesday morning. The two were believed to be married or engaged.
Farook, who had worked for the San Bernardino County Health Department for five years, left the party “under some circumstances that were described as angry.”
At a news conference Wednesday night, Farhan Khan, Farook’s brother-in-law, said he “cannot express how sad I am for what happened today.”
He said that he was “in shock that something like this could happen” and that he last spoke to Farook a week ago.
“I have no idea why he would do something like this,” he said, declining to speculate on the motive for the shootings.
A knowledgeable source said Farook’s brother is also believed to have been involved in the crimes, NBC said.
Following the slayings, officials followed tips that led them to a home in Redlands, about 10 miles from San Bernardino. As officers were setting up, a vehicle that was believed to have been used by the shooters was seen leaving, Burguan said.
Police pursued the vehicle, and multiple officers engaged in a shootout with Farook and Malik, who died inside the vehicle. A third person fled from the vehicle and has been detained, but Burguan did not say whether the person was involved in the shooting and did not say whether the person was Farook’s brother.
An officer was wounded in the shootout, but the officer’s injuries are not believed to be life-threatening.
Farook and Malik were dressed in “assault-style clothing” and were armed with assault-style weapons and handguns, Burguan said. There was “suspicious stuff” around the SUV, so a bomb disposal robot was deployed near the scene several hours after the shooting.
We want to “extend our true sadness to the families of the victims,” said David Bowdich with the FBI, which has taken over the case, according to The Washington Post.
He said he is still unwilling to say definitively whether the shooting was terrorism, but “we’re definitely making some movements that it is a possibility, making some adjustments to our investigation.”
A motive is still not known, though federal law officials told the Los Angeles Times that a dispute at a holiday gathering may have sparked the shooting.
A senior federal official who is monitoring the case told the Times that investigators think one of the shooters left the party after getting into an argument and returned with one or two armed accomplices.
“We have heard they were in a meeting or holiday-type event there, somebody did leave, but no idea if that is the person who came back,” the police chief said. “There was some type of dispute when somebody left that party, but we have no idea if those are the people that came back.”
Burguan said officials a bomb squad found a suspicious device at the social services center that “is believed to be a potential explosive device.”
After the shootout that left the two suspects dead, police were serving a search warrant on a home in Redlands in connection with the shooting. NBC reported the home is connected to at least one of the suspects.
“At the minimum we have a domestic terrorism-type situation that occurred here,” Burguan said. “They came prepared to do what they did and they were on a mission.”
Witnesses said several people locked themselves in their offices, desperately waiting to be rescued after the gunfire erupted at the center.
The attack took place in a conference area about 11 a.m. Pacific time as the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health was having a banquet, said Maybeth Field, president and CEO of the social services center.
She said about 25 people worked at the building, which included a library as well as the conference center.
The Los Angeles Times reported the social services center has nearly 670 employees.
According to The Associated Press, the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health confirmed its employees were inside when the gunman opened fire, but did not release any further information.
No weapons were recovered at the center, where authorities spent much of the night investigating unidentified items in the building.
As the hunt for the suspects unfolded, office buildings and at least one school were locked down in the city of 214,000 people about 60 miles east of Los Angeles. Roads also were blocked.
President Barack Obama was briefed on the attack by his homeland security adviser.
In an interview with CBS News after the massacre, Obama said there’s a pattern of mass shootings in the U.S. that has no parallel in the world. He said there are steps the nation can take to reduce the frequency of such tragedies.
Obama called for Americans to unite to make mass shootings rarer, saying the U.S. should never think such incidents are a normal part of life.
California Gov. Jerry Brown said in a written statement that “California will spare no effort in bringing these killers to justice.”
Flags at the state Capitol were lowered to half-staff in honor of the victims.
California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, according to the Los Angeles Times, said: “Each time I see breaking news of yet another mass shooting, I feel it in the pit of my stomach. Congress can’t stop every shooting, but we can help reduce their frequency. I remain hopeful that enough of my colleagues will join me to make that a reality.”
Several presidential candidates, including Hillary Clinton and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, weighed in on the attacks.
San Bernardino Mayor Carey Davis said at a news conference Wednesday evening that the city was “still on alert,” according to The New York Times.
“Our city is suffering from those who decided to express themselves in a violent fashion,” he said. “One of the concerns we have is that people still know the city is on alert.”
Davis said city officials were planning a vigil in honor of the victims.
According to NBC, the LA Council on American-Islamic Relations condemned “this horrific and revolting attack.”
Terry Petit said his daughter works at the center, and he got a text from her saying she was hiding in the building after hearing gunshots.
Petit choked back tears as he read the texts for reporters outside the center. He said she wrote: “People shot. In the office waiting for cops. Pray for us. I am locked in an office.”
Marcos Aguilera’s wife was in the building when the gunfire erupted. He said a shooter entered the building next to his wife’s office and opened fire.
“They locked themselves in her office. They seen bodies on the floor,” Aguilera told KABC-TV, adding that his wife was able to get out of the building unharmed.
Loma Linda University Medical Center officials said late Wednesday they five adults from the scene of the massacre had been admitted as patients, according to the Los Angeles Times. Two were listed in critical but stable condition and two were in fair condition. The condition of the fifth person was not available.
According to KPCC, a Southern California public radio station, there was a bomb threat at the hospital Wednesday afternoon, but it was later deemed to be unfounded.
According to The Washington Post, Wednesday’s shooting is the 355th mass shooting this year. The Los Angeles Times has complied a list of the deadliest mass shootings since 1984, which can be viewed here.
Here’s a map of all the mass shootings in 2015. As details surrounding the San Bernardino, California, shooting gradually emerged Wednesday evening, President Barack Obama told CBS News that the U.S. has “a pattern now of mass shooting in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world.”
The mass shooting at a social services agency in San Bernardino left at least 14 dead and 17 others wounded. It is also the deadliest mass shooting in the U.S. since Adam Lanza opened fire at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut, on Dec. 15, 2012, killing 26 children and adults, the Associated Press reported.
Using data from shootingtracker.com, which is maintained by a Reddit group, we’ve updated our map that documents all the U.S. mass shootings in 2015 alone. The group defines mass shootings as incidents when at least four people are killed or wounded, including the gunman..
The mass shooting at a social services agency in San Bernardino left at least 14 dead and 17 others wounded. It is also the deadliest mass shooting in the U.S. since Adam Lanza opened fire at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut, on Dec. 15, 2012, killing 26 children and adults, the Associated Press reported.
Using data from shootingtracker.com, which is maintained by a Reddit group, we’ve updated our map that documents all the U.S. mass shootings in 2015 alone. The group defines mass shootings as incidents when at least four people are killed or wounded, including the gunman..
According to the tracker’s data, the San Bernardino incident represents the 355th shooting this year, the Washington Post reported. The incident in San Bernardino also overshadowed another shooting in Savannah, Georgia that occurred the same day, claiming one life and injuring three others.
However, there’s not a standard definition of “mass shooting.” Adam Lankford, a criminal justice professor at the University of Alabama previously told the NewsHour that FBI’s data included incidents where fewer than four people were shot and didn’t include shootings of multiple people that occur in a home or other uncrowded setting.
On Friday, a gunmen surrendered to police after an hourslong siege in Colorado Springs, Colorado, where he killed three people and wounded nine others in a Planned Parenthood clinic. The same day, a gunfight killed two and injured two in Sacramento, California. On Nov. 23, there were mass shootings in Houston, Minneapolis and Columbus, Ohio. There were five shootings on Nov. 22.
On Oct. 1, when a gunman killed 10 people and wounded seven more at a community college in Roseburg, Oregon, Obama also spoke of the routine nature of these shootings.
“[A]s I said just a few months ago, and I said a few months before that, and I said each time we see one of these mass shootings, our thoughts and prayers are not enough. It’s not enough,” Obama said.
Police, feds probe terror as possible motive in SoCal massacre. Law enforcement authorities are eyeing terrorism as a possible motive for an attack in Southern California that left 14 dead and was carried out with cold precision by a "devout" Muslim and his wife, who were killed hours later in a shootout with police.
However, there’s not a standard definition of “mass shooting.” Adam Lankford, a criminal justice professor at the University of Alabama previously told the NewsHour that FBI’s data included incidents where fewer than four people were shot and didn’t include shootings of multiple people that occur in a home or other uncrowded setting.
On Friday, a gunmen surrendered to police after an hourslong siege in Colorado Springs, Colorado, where he killed three people and wounded nine others in a Planned Parenthood clinic. The same day, a gunfight killed two and injured two in Sacramento, California. On Nov. 23, there were mass shootings in Houston, Minneapolis and Columbus, Ohio. There were five shootings on Nov. 22.
On Oct. 1, when a gunman killed 10 people and wounded seven more at a community college in Roseburg, Oregon, Obama also spoke of the routine nature of these shootings.
“[A]s I said just a few months ago, and I said a few months before that, and I said each time we see one of these mass shootings, our thoughts and prayers are not enough. It’s not enough,” Obama said.
Police, feds probe terror as possible motive in SoCal massacre. Law enforcement authorities are eyeing terrorism as a possible motive for an attack in Southern California that left 14 dead and was carried out with cold precision by a "devout" Muslim and his wife, who were killed hours later in a shootout with police.
Dressed in tactical gear and toting assault rifles, Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, and Tashfeen Malik, 27, burst into a San Bernardino social services facility and shot up a conference room where Farook's employer, the county health department, was hosting a holiday party. The pair escaped in a black SUV after the attack, which authorities said was over within minutes, only to resurface four hours later and less than 2 miles away in a fierce gun battle on the city's main drag.
"They came prepared to do what they did, as if they were on a mission," San Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan said.
Farook, who Burguan said was born in the U.S. and had worked at the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health for five years, was described by co-workers as a "devout" Muslim, who is believed to have lived in nearby Redlands. The nationality of Malik, who reportedly recently had a baby with Farook, was not identified. Family members told The Associated Press the couple was married.
Law enforcement officials said late Wednesday they could not rule out terrorism as a possible motive. The FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force was aiding in the investigation.
A law enforcement source told Fox News that the couple were each carrying an AR-15 rifle and a pistol when they were shot and killed by police after a brief chase in their black SUV about 2 miles from the initial shooting site. The source said the vehicle also contained so-called "rollout bags" with multiple pipe bombs, as well as additional ammunition. The couple also had GoPro cameras strapped to their body armor and wore tactical clothing, including vests stuffed with ammunition magazines.
"That's a military tactic for a sustained fight," the source told Fox News of the rollout bags.
In addition to the explosives found at the SUV, authorities discovered and detonated three pipe bombs late Wednesday at the Inland Regional Center, the complex where the initial shooting took place about 60 miles east of Los Angeles.
Another source described a house in Redlands that was being searched in connection with the shooting as "an IED facility." The source said investigators discovered multiple pipe bombs in the house, as well as small explosives that were strapped to remote-controlled cars.
The initial shooting happened shortly before 11 a.m. local time at the state-run center, which includes three buildings where developmentally disabled people of all ages are treated. The conference area had been rented out by Farook's colleagues for a holiday banquet, according to authorities. The chief said that Farook had angrily left the party before returning with Malik. However, other investigators doubted the alleged dispute had taken place or whether the shooting could solely be chalked up to a workplace dispute due to the apparent planning behind the attack as well as the heavy weaponry used.
Patrick Baccari, a co-worker of Farook who suffered minor wounds from shrapnel slicing through the building's bathroom walls, told the Associated Press he had been sitting at the same table as Farook at the banquet before his colleague suddenly disappeared, leaving his coat on his chair.
Baccari also said that Farook had traveled to Saudi Arabia for about a month this past spring. When Farook came back, word spread that he had gotten married and the woman he described as a pharmacist joined him shortly afterward. The couple had a baby later this year. Baccari added that the reserved Farook showed no signs of unusual behavior, although he grew out his beard several months ago.
The couple dropped off their 6-month-old daughter with relatives Wednesday morning, saying they had a doctor's appointment, Hussam Ayloush, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), said after talking with family. Farhan Khan, who is married to Farook's sister, told reporters he last spoke to his brother-in-law about a week ago. He said he was in shock, condemned the violence, and had "absolutely no idea why he would do this."
"They came prepared to do what they did as if on a mission."
- San Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan
FBI spokesman David Bowdich acknowledged that "adjustments" had been made in the investigation with an eye on the possibility terrorism was involved.
"It's a possibility, but we are not willing to go down that road yet," Bowdich said.
About four hours after the shooting, with police looking for a dark SUV, officers staking out the Redlands home saw a vehicle matching that description. Authorities pursued the SUV, and a gun battle broke out around 3 p.m., authorities said. One officer suffered a minor injury.
The aftermath of the shootout was captured live by television news helicopters.
It was unclear where the suspects may have been during the nearly four hours following the lightning-quick attack, but they did not get far. A police spokeswoman said police came across the SUV while "doing follow-up work," and several reports said the car was at a nearby home police were staking out when the suspects got in and tried to flee. It was not immediately clear if that home was the one searched later in Redlands.
Word that police were hot on their trail came even as emergency responders were treating the wounded on the scene, and sparked a flurry of law enforcement racing to the scene just blocks away. The gunfight, caught on cellphone video by a bystander, was a furious exchange of bullets in which a passenger in the SUV blasted at police through the shattered rear windshield before the vehicle was disabled in a hail of return fire.
Center employees, who undergo monthly training drills to prepare for active shooter situations, initially thought the incident was a drill, according to the Los Angeles Times. But when real bullets flew, several hid in closets, barricaded themselves in rooms or fled for their lives.
The Inland Regional Center is one of 21 facilities serving people with developmental disabilities run by the state, said Nancy Lungren, spokeswoman for the California Department of Developmental Services. The social services agency administers, authorizes and pays for assistance to people with disabilities such as autism and mental retardation. On an average day, doctors at the regional centers would be evaluating toddlers whose parents have concerns and case workers meeting with developmentally disabled adults.
The San Bernardino facility consists of three buildings, and employs approximately 600 workers. Inland Regional Center Executive Director Lavinia Johnson told Reuters the shooting happened at a conference center her group rented out for a San Bernardino Health Department county personnel holiday party.
Glenn Willwerth, who was near enough to the scene to hear shots being fired, told Fox News after the massacre that he saw a black SUV that matched the description of the one in the subsequent shootout leaving afterward, driving slowly and deliberately. He later told Fox News' Greta Van Susteren that vehicle was "identical" to the one involved in the shootout.
Witnesses described passing bodies on the ground as they fled, and a makeshift triage center was set up outside the facility. A local NBC videographer reported there were not enough ambulances to transport victims, and that people were using pickup trucks to carry victims to triage areas. Hours later, busloads of employees from the center were taken to a nearby church where authorities planned to interview them.
At nearby Loma Linda Medical Center, a spokeswoman said the hospital was treating five adult patients, two of whom were in critical, but stable condition; two in fair condition and one still being assessed.
Other victims were being treated at Arrowhead Regional Medical Center, where Kathy Hotetz waited for information about her sister, Denise Peraza, 27, who was shot in the leg.
"She's alive. That's all I know," said Hotetz, 37. "Not knowing any more than that is the scariest part."
Kevin Ortiz, 24, was shot twice in the leg and once in the shoulder during the attack, but managed to call both his wife of two weeks and his father to tell them he was alive.
"Kevin said he had been shot three times and that he was in pain but he was all right," his wife, Dyana Ortiz, 23, said. " Then he said 'I love you' and I said 'I love you.'"
Wednesday's bloodshed was the nation's deadliest mass shooting since the attack at a school in Newtown, Conn., three years ago that left 26 children and adults dead.
President Obama was briefed on the situation by his Homeland Security Adviser Lisa Monaco and asked to be updated on the situation as it develops. In Washington, House Speaker Paul Ryan called for a moment of silence before that city's annual tree lighting. Fox News' Adam Housley and the Associated Press contributed to this report.
2016 Presidential Candidates React to San Bernardino Shooting.
Many of the candidates tweeted their response to the shooting.
Martin O’Malley (D)
Hillary Clinton (D)
Mike Huckabee (R)
Donald Trump (R)
Jeb Bush (R)
Senator Bernie Sanders (D)
Senator Rand Paul (R)
Inland Regional Center coordinates with generic services to normalize the lives of people with developmental disabilities and their families by working to include them in the everyday routines and life rhythms of the community and by facilitating needed supports for them.
Details about an active mass shooting at the office building of the Inland Regional Center, a nonprofit organization that works with individuals with developmental disabilities, are still emerging.
The center has nearly 670 staff members, who provide services to more than 30,200 people with disabilities and their families in San Bernardino and Riverside counties. In the wake of this major crisis, the organization will need lots of support to recover.
You can help: Donate here to support the Inland Regional Center in the wake of this tragedy!
Here is an article I wrote back on October 4th entitled, Another Day, Another Mass Shooting:
After another mass shooting in a white middle class part of America, there is the same uproar about the USA needing national background checks. There are also calls for us to look towards mental behavior issues. National Background checks and clamping down on mental behavior issues alone are an ineffective safety measure. We need to close existing loop holes in 33 states that allow the sales of firearms at gun shows without not only a simple background check but also without a simple verification of the gun purchaser's identity.
I recently saw an expose' on television that had a 15 year old kid attempt to buy a lottery ticket which he was denied to do at that market. I then watched that same kid try to buy liquor which again, he was denied by that liquor store clerk. He then tried to buy a pack of cigarettes which he was denied by that attendant at that market.
He then went to a gun show in Pennsylvania, I believe where he was able to buy 5 guns within an hour span of time.
There is something wrong with that scenario.
Besides, they are mere symptoms to the major problem we face with gun violence today
However, there is nothing worse than anything set forth by law, than gun makers being immune to civil liability laws against them. The following is a brief summary of the Equal access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act, written by The Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress. They are a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress and this bill I speak about was introduced to the House on 1/22/2013.
"The 'Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act' prohibits a court from dismissing an action against a manufacturer, seller, or trade association for damages or relief resulting from an alleged defect or negligence with respect to a product, or conduct that would be actionable under state common or statutory law in the absence of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, on the basis that the action is for damages or relief from the criminal, unlawful, or volitional use of a qualified product."
Congress initially passed the law with support from Republicans as well as Democrats in pro-gun states, and Schiff’s proposed legislation failed.
What it does is make the contents of the Firearms Trace System database that is maintained by the National Trace Center of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) subject to subpoena or other discovery and admissible as evidence in law suits. It permits such contents to be used, relied on, or disclosed, and permits testimony or other evidence to be based on the data, on the same basis as other information in a civil action in any state or federal court or in an administrative proceeding.
That is not allowed by law, today.
It should be proposed as legislation that would ease current law to allow people to file civil law suits against gun manufacturers and others in the industry when they act irresponsibly. The The Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act, from Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), would amend the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). According to Rep. Schiff, that 2005 law enacted by George Bush Jr. and by Dick Cheney gives gun manufacturers, distributors and gun dealers immunity from most civil negligence and product liability actions. That was described that year as the 'mother of all laws' because what it does is to make an entire industry immune to law suits.
I therefore ask every reader the following question which is what industry on this planet is immune to law suits as a whole? I ask any reader to name one. I then ask major media outlets to take hold of this article, and to run with it. I then ask the POTUS to do the same thing. I especially ask the people in Congress to do the same thing.
Because by mentioning talking points such as they do today, that is just a product of the problem. It is NOT the root of it. In reality, there are only two scientific constants to every killing with a gun and that is the gun itself and the bullet used to do it. Everything else is a part of the problem and again, there is no real science behind it. Plus, every other issue behind every gun death, varies (i.e.: racism, general mental behavior issues, the magazine a gun holds, the type of a gun, people in general etc. are the reason given as talking points about why whomever kills anything). I will say it one more time. The ONLY scientific thing regarding every killing, murder, injury are the gun and the bullet itself.
Let me assume that no one is going to believe that we Americans are going to get rid of every gun and / or every bullet.
However, I myself say and the Representative Adam Schiff believe that his bill is needed to be passed as a way to allow suits to go forward when these entities are found to be negligent, or for product liability issues, let alone for selling a gun or any weaponry in a corrupt way (i.e.: knowingly selling guns and bullets to someone that you know will use it for a crime).
Since 2005, "numerous cases around the nation have been dismissed on the basis of PLCAA even when the gun dealers acted in a fashion that would qualify as negligent if it involved any other product," Schiff said in a letter to House colleagues seeking support for his bill. "The victims in these cases are denied the right to even discover and introduce evidence of negligence.
(Adam) Schiff goes on to say that his "bill will reinstate the intent of PLCAA, allowing civil cases to go forward against irresponsible actors" "Letting courts hear these cases would provide justice to victims while creating incentives for responsible business practices that would reduce injuries and deaths. At the same time, my bill will provide protection for gun companies who are sued when they do not act negligently, which was the purpose of PLCAA."
And, I agree with that 100%. With such a law in place, the incentive to not sell any old product to anyone would help root out a lot of these issues we face today. Certain people would not have a 13 gun arsenal in its hands (Authorities say dead suspect had more than a dozen firearms, including six recovered from the crime scene.). Schiff added that current law only protects the "worst actors in the industry," and said that "good gun companies" and I say gun sellers "don't need special protection from the law; bad companies don't deserve it."
Schiff's bill is co-sponsored by 11 other house Democrats, including Budget Committee ranking member Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.). It has been dead since it was placed into action in January 2013. There have been thousands of people killed with guns and bullets since that day.
Schiff also introduced another bill that would create a new, two-year sentence for "straw purchasers" of firearms, or people who are buying weapons for people who cannot pass a background check. He states that "the laws currently on the books targeting straw purchasers of firearms don't treat it as anything other than a paperwork violation." He also states that "we need to crack down on those who are buying weapons with the express purpose of providing them to those who can't pass a background check" and that "straw purchasing is not a 'paperwork' violation — it's a serious crime that has led to a horrendous increase in criminal access to firearms."
Our culture that is geared towards guns is fine to have in America. However, we Americans have lost our responsibility to do it.
CNN reported the other day about American deaths in terrorism vs. gun violence which they spelled out to everyone in one graph:
Think about the money we spend on every year to combat terrorism compared to what we spend every year to combat Gun violence in America.
I ask every reader to understand that simple fact. I ask every reader to think about it that way. Either we need to cut down what we spend on terrorism or we need to have an equalling out affect to happen fast.
This POTUS (Barack Obama) stated the other day after the latest mass shooting was his 15th press release on them.
I must also add that same day 4 people in the city of Philadelphia were killed at the same time this news story broke, yet there was no mention about it on any news outlet, except for the local ones surrounding the city of Philadelphia.
Regardless of that happening in Philly that same day without the media taking hold of it, Obama did say that "the reporting is routine." Obama went on to say that his "response here at this podium ends up being routine, the conversation in the aftermath of it. We've become numb to this." He then went on to ask all news organizations to tally up the number of Americans killed through terrorist attacks in the last decade and compare it with the number of Americans who have died in gun violence.
Accordingly to the writers at CNN, and them using numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, they found that from 2001 to 2013, 406,496 people died by firearms on U.S. soil. (2013 is the most recent year CDC data for deaths by firearms is available.) This data covered all manners of death, including homicide, accident and suicide.
And, that according to the U.S. State Department, the number of U.S. citizens killed overseas as a result of incidents of terrorism from 2001 to 2013 was 350.
In addition, CNN compiled all terrorism incidents inside the U.S. and found that between 2001 and 2013, there were 3,030 people killed in domestic acts of terrorism.* This brings the total to 3,380.
That is not normal how we think about the two issues here. We get free reign to spend whatever to thwart terrorism which I respect, we also have lost so many civil liberties in the process but then again, the same goes to try thwart gun violence. Mat Welch from Reason stated on the real Time With Bill Maher show Friday night that was why initially, that the 'stop and frisk' laws were set in place in most major cities in America. I think in either case that if one has nothing to hide, than it is mostly OK, however for the [people that do have things to hide, it is not good for the likes of them.
There have been 3 lawsuits to attempt to hold gun makers, sellers liable for shootings in 2015 so far. There was a legal complaint set up in Newtown, Connecticut after that horrid shooting and that lawsuit is relating the death of children with violence. The complaint tells about of the dead children throughout it. Jesse Lewis, 6, an only child, loved riding horses. His last meal was an egg sandwich with hot chocolate. Dylan Hockley, 6, loved garlic bread and the moon. His favorite color was purple. Benjamin Wheeler, 6, wanted to be an architect, a paleontologist or a lighthouse keeper. The three died Dec. 14, 2012, when Adam Lanza opened fire inside Sandy Hook Elementary School.
They did the same thing describing the murdered people in Oregon this week when they read the names of those victims. They prefaced every one of them with something they believed in and liked to do. One was an animal activist if I remember correct but regardless of those tactics if you will, the suit had been filed in federal court in Connecticut in January, Soto et al. v. Bushmaster Firearms International, LLC. That is one of several lawsuits making their way through the court that seek money damages from gun shops and manufacturers. However, other than talking about the likes of the victims and what they did for the world, these cases have no weight per se and it is because of a decade-old federal law that I mentioned above (Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act) and that gives the gun industry total immunity to never be sued.
Here’s a look at the law:
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act
President George W. Bush along with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist sign the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which shields the firearms industry from civil lawsuits brought by victims of gun crimes, on Oct. 26, 2005, in Washington. The legislation at the core of gun lawsuits is the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Signed into law by President George W. Bush and by Dick Cheney in 2005. That law restricts there from being any civil lawsuits set up by crime victims against gun makers and sellers.
It first came about after the DC Killings when there were many law suits filed and therefore, the gun industry challenged a series of setbacks because of them. Among them was a suit brought up in New York City claiming how gun manufacturers and sellers had allowed their weapons to be sold in illegal markets, creating a public nuisance, and 2002 California legislation explicitly allowing suits against gun manufacturers.
The gun industry claimed at that time how civil law suits had cost it more than $100 million, and members of Congress began to voice concern about the fate of military weapon suppliers if the entire industry went bankrupt. “Where will our soldiers get the arms they need to protect our freedoms?” asked Rep. Candice S. Miller, R-Mich., according to the Los Angeles Times. “From France? From Germany?”
The law put the National Rifle Association against gun safety organizations. In the Washington Post that year, it had stated that the legislation “barely pretends to be anything other than a special-interest gimme designed to shield the gun industry from lawsuits.”
The debate was that if gun manufacturers and retailers are not held responsible, who pays when a mass shooting or another gun tragedy happens? It was stipulated back then in 2005.
Then, with the Newtown massacre of those kids and when other mass shootings occurred, was when Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., introduced the Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act. That would then hone in that law enacted in 2005 law by then allowing suits when manufacturers, wholesalers and dealers are negligent in the ways described in this article.
That law “denies the victims of gun violence and their families their day in court, and in doing so it protects the worst actors in the gun industry,” Schiff said.
The current law does include a few exceptions that allow gun manufacturers and retailers to be held liable: (1) when a manufacturer or seller knowingly falsifies federal or state records about the gun (however, it is against the Federal Law to alter or change any Federal Court Document or State Court Document anyway), (2) when a manufacturer or seller sells a gun to someone who they know is prohibited from having a gun (that means nothing without any national background check registry set in place), and (3) when a design defect directly results in property damage, physical injuries or death (which is negated because of the guns are manufactured today and is very hard to prove).
The exceptions of this is in the sates of Connecticut, Wisconsin and Alaska.
Currently, there are three cases being seen today and that were brought forth which are:
1. The Newtown suit
Two years after Adam Lanza went into the Sandy Hook Elementary School to for some reason, killed what were 20 children and six school staff members, the victims’ families announced plans to sue file suit against the manufacturer of the gun Lanza used, a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle. They also added that the shop that sold the gun to Lanza to be part of that suit. The complaint, accuses the manufacturer and the seller total "disregard of the unreasonable risks the rifle posed outside of specialized, highly regulated institutions like the armed forces and law enforcement.” The Plaintiff's stated in the complaint how the gun maker and store owner should have known "that people unfit to operate the weapons would gain access to them." Most notably in that case, the plaintiff's state that, "Bushmaster should have known of the “unreasonably high risk” that the rifle would be used in a mass shooting."
They state how the AR-15 is designed as a "military weapon, engineered to deliver maximum carnage with extreme efficiency,” and that how its design of it features “exceptional muzzle velocity, the ability to accommodate large-capacity magazines, and effective rapid fire.”
Both the Plaintiff's involved in that law suit and The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms industry that happens to be also located in Newtown, have not commented on the lawsuit to any media outlet covering it. The NRA also did not respond to anything with regard to that law suit and let alone about the suit that that they most likely feel should be shielded by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act legislation.
The Newtown case takes a different approach than many other law suits vs. gun sellers and directed at the gun manufacturing industry.
It focuses on negligence by the seller and by the manufacturer. And, it focuses on why we have assault types of weaponry readily available for sale to the general public. The legal angle is how it is negligent to allow assault styled weapons like we use at war and during war's pose a danger to a person not trained to use it. "While other lawsuits have focused on problems with the sale of a gun, this one claims that by introducing the Bushmaster AR-15 gun into the marketplace, the manufacturer should be held liable."
This is the first time this has been raised in any court system. Many legal experts have raised doubts on the lawsuit’s chances of success. Nicholas Johnson, a law professor at Fordham University states that “it’s almost exactly the sort of claim that the legislation was designed to prevent,” I think it keeps the conversation going but at the same time, no one really talks about the suit today. Even the victims families that were interviewed this week on major media outlets never said one word about it.
2. The Badger Guns case
In April this year, a gun lawsuit hit the courts in Wisconsin. The Norberg et al. vs. Badger Guns Inc. et al., is set forth because of injuries occurring when two Milwaukee police officers who were shot in 2009 by an 18-year-old kid named Julius Burton. They tried to pull him over for riding his bicycle on the sidewalk and were somehow shot because of it. The officers say that Badger Guns, is liable because the store should have known it was illegal to sell the handgun to an underage kid at the time. The under aged kid was however, with a friend that happened to be 21 years old. The lawsuit is set up because the gun store owner and sales person should have known that buyer of the gun was the under aged kid which had been stipulated clearly on the purchase slip. On that slip, it was written that the 21-year-old was not the buyer of the gun, let alone would not have been the owner.
The gun shop's defense is that that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act protects it from any liabilities in such a claim.
The officers claim how “it was a straw buy,” and how it's “our contention that there were plenty of legitimate red flags that surround the purchase.”
This Badger Guns gained national notoriety in 2005 when federal data showed it was the nation’s top seller of guns linked to crimes (537 of its guns were recovered by police). In that claim, the Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Jeffrey Conen ruled in favor of the officers in January 2014. It found the claim met one of the exceptions of the legislation, clearing the way for the upcoming trial.
3. A challenge in Alaska
This claim is basically a wrongful death lawsuit. In 2006, Simone Kim was fatally shot while painting at a Juneau supermarket. Later, a drifter named Jason Coday was convicted in the killing. The Kim family filed a wrongful death suit, alleging that a gun dealer illegally sold Coday the gun without a proper background check. The lawsuit alleges that Coday went to Rayco Sales and walked out with the gun after putting $200 on the counter as a bribe to be able to get it.
The gun shop owner told a very different story saying that when Coday came into the store, that he wasn’t interested in buying a gun that day. Coday evidently then put on his backpack as if he was going to leave the store, that the seller then walked away from the area. It was told that the gun shop employee saw the $200 in cash on a counter later on, and and he then realized that the gun had been stolen by Coday from the counter. It was also told that the gun seller quickly began to search for Coday and that he was not to be blamed for the bribery and/or the negligence.
Therefore, did Coday steal the gun without the sales clerk's knowledge or was there a bribe in action? Either way, there is negligence but one is willful knowledge and one was just for walking away while guns lay down on the counter with the great ease to swipe. A trial judge eventually dismissed the claim because its ruling was that of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. However, it was appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court that then ruled the case could go forward, saying it was not barred if the gun was sold illegally without the seller doing a background check. It went back to the trial courts in Alaska.
It does turn out that licensed gun dealers have a protection that no other gun dealer has because think about it this way, if someone walks into anyone's house to steal their guns when it is not locked up in a safe manner, and then they take those guns to shoot people or to use it in crimes, whomever can indeed be sued for negligence.
Conversely, if it is a licensed gun dealer, and somebody does that to them, they would be protected by this law.
Overall, this issue needs to dealt with by the root. Which is by law. If we start by fixing that law, we can then start to place together the other pieces of it. Like doing national background checks. Like changing up the gun show loop hole and like to not allow there to be assault weapons sold to the general public. Until then, it will not stop. And, I will realize that no one is serious about gun safety issues.
Because i maintain that any firm believers of that antiquated 2nd amendment (which the forefathers that enacted our amendments wrote them up to be altered and amended; it does not have to be written in stone so to speak like people make it out to be), have lost their privilege today. There is nothing wrong with a responsible gun manufacturer, gun seller and gun user. That's is not what this aimed to be against. It is for the corrupt people. Besides, if "Corporations are People Too My Friends," those corporations that make guns and sell them, should have morals too. It should nit be only about that other Amendment (14th) where it is only about creating as much profits and with as much profit margin as possible. I maintain there should be a moral fiber to that amendment too.
Also and occasionally, a lobbying client may refer to a bill number from a previous Congress, either in error or because they are lobbying on a bill that has not yet been assigned a number. In these cases, it will appear as though they are lobbying on the bill sharing that number in the Congress in which they are filing, which in most cases is a different bill entirely.
To see more information about the bill the client is lobbying on, you can look at the specific report under the "Report images" tab below on the lobbying client's profile page.
Here is a list of them from 2014 at the Center for Responsive Politics:
And, here is a list of them from 2015:
If you believe that there is an error, please e-mail the Center for Responsive Politics at info@crp.org. They will attempt to correct it.
2016 Presidential Candidates React to San Bernardino Shooting.
Many of the candidates tweeted their response to the shooting.
Martin O’Malley (D)
Martin O'Malley
Horrifying news out of #SanBernardino. Enough is enough: it's time to stand up to the @NRA and enact meaningful gun safety laws
Hillary Clinton
I refuse to accept this as normal. We must take action to stop gun violence now. -H
Gov. Mike Huckabee
Praying for those impacted by the shooting in California today.
Donald Trump (R)
Donald J. Trump
California shooting looks very bad. Good luck to law enforcement and God bless. This is when our police are so appreciated!
Jeb Bush
Praying for the victims, their families & the San Bernardino first responders in the wake of this tragic shooting.
Dr. Ben Carson (R)
Dr. Ben Carson
My thoughts and prayers are with the shooting victims and their families in San Bernardino.
Governor John Kasich (R)
John Kasich
My thoughts & prayers go out to those impacted by the shooting in San Bernardino, especially the first responders. -John
Senator Lindsey Graham (R)
Lindsey Graham
Thoughts & prayers are with #SanBernardino
Senator Ted Cruz (R)
Ted Cruz
Our prayers are with the victims, their families, and the first responders in San Bernardino who willingly go into harm’s way to save others
Senator Bernie Sanders (D)
Bernie Sanders
Mass shootings are becoming an almost-everyday occurrence in this country. This sickening and senseless gun violence must stop.
Senator Rand Paul (R)
Dr. Rand Paul
My thoughts and prayers are with the victims, families, and brave first responders during this unspeakable tragedy.
For more coverage, including more from witnesses, click here. To follow the San Bernardino police chief on Twitter for updates click here.
Help the Inland Regional Center Rebuild and Recover.Details about an active mass shooting at the office building of the Inland Regional Center, a nonprofit organization that works with individuals with developmental disabilities, are still emerging.
The center has nearly 670 staff members, who provide services to more than 30,200 people with disabilities and their families in San Bernardino and Riverside counties. In the wake of this major crisis, the organization will need lots of support to recover.
You can help: Donate here to support the Inland Regional Center in the wake of this tragedy!
Here is an article I wrote back on October 4th entitled, Another Day, Another Mass Shooting:
After another mass shooting in a white middle class part of America, there is the same uproar about the USA needing national background checks. There are also calls for us to look towards mental behavior issues. National Background checks and clamping down on mental behavior issues alone are an ineffective safety measure. We need to close existing loop holes in 33 states that allow the sales of firearms at gun shows without not only a simple background check but also without a simple verification of the gun purchaser's identity.
I recently saw an expose' on television that had a 15 year old kid attempt to buy a lottery ticket which he was denied to do at that market. I then watched that same kid try to buy liquor which again, he was denied by that liquor store clerk. He then tried to buy a pack of cigarettes which he was denied by that attendant at that market.
He then went to a gun show in Pennsylvania, I believe where he was able to buy 5 guns within an hour span of time.
There is something wrong with that scenario.
Besides, they are mere symptoms to the major problem we face with gun violence today
However, there is nothing worse than anything set forth by law, than gun makers being immune to civil liability laws against them. The following is a brief summary of the Equal access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act, written by The Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress. They are a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress and this bill I speak about was introduced to the House on 1/22/2013.
"The 'Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act' prohibits a court from dismissing an action against a manufacturer, seller, or trade association for damages or relief resulting from an alleged defect or negligence with respect to a product, or conduct that would be actionable under state common or statutory law in the absence of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, on the basis that the action is for damages or relief from the criminal, unlawful, or volitional use of a qualified product."
Congress initially passed the law with support from Republicans as well as Democrats in pro-gun states, and Schiff’s proposed legislation failed.
What it does is make the contents of the Firearms Trace System database that is maintained by the National Trace Center of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) subject to subpoena or other discovery and admissible as evidence in law suits. It permits such contents to be used, relied on, or disclosed, and permits testimony or other evidence to be based on the data, on the same basis as other information in a civil action in any state or federal court or in an administrative proceeding.
That is not allowed by law, today.
It should be proposed as legislation that would ease current law to allow people to file civil law suits against gun manufacturers and others in the industry when they act irresponsibly. The The Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act, from Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), would amend the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). According to Rep. Schiff, that 2005 law enacted by George Bush Jr. and by Dick Cheney gives gun manufacturers, distributors and gun dealers immunity from most civil negligence and product liability actions. That was described that year as the 'mother of all laws' because what it does is to make an entire industry immune to law suits.
I therefore ask every reader the following question which is what industry on this planet is immune to law suits as a whole? I ask any reader to name one. I then ask major media outlets to take hold of this article, and to run with it. I then ask the POTUS to do the same thing. I especially ask the people in Congress to do the same thing.
Because by mentioning talking points such as they do today, that is just a product of the problem. It is NOT the root of it. In reality, there are only two scientific constants to every killing with a gun and that is the gun itself and the bullet used to do it. Everything else is a part of the problem and again, there is no real science behind it. Plus, every other issue behind every gun death, varies (i.e.: racism, general mental behavior issues, the magazine a gun holds, the type of a gun, people in general etc. are the reason given as talking points about why whomever kills anything). I will say it one more time. The ONLY scientific thing regarding every killing, murder, injury are the gun and the bullet itself.
Let me assume that no one is going to believe that we Americans are going to get rid of every gun and / or every bullet.
However, I myself say and the Representative Adam Schiff believe that his bill is needed to be passed as a way to allow suits to go forward when these entities are found to be negligent, or for product liability issues, let alone for selling a gun or any weaponry in a corrupt way (i.e.: knowingly selling guns and bullets to someone that you know will use it for a crime).
Since 2005, "numerous cases around the nation have been dismissed on the basis of PLCAA even when the gun dealers acted in a fashion that would qualify as negligent if it involved any other product," Schiff said in a letter to House colleagues seeking support for his bill. "The victims in these cases are denied the right to even discover and introduce evidence of negligence.
(Adam) Schiff goes on to say that his "bill will reinstate the intent of PLCAA, allowing civil cases to go forward against irresponsible actors" "Letting courts hear these cases would provide justice to victims while creating incentives for responsible business practices that would reduce injuries and deaths. At the same time, my bill will provide protection for gun companies who are sued when they do not act negligently, which was the purpose of PLCAA."
And, I agree with that 100%. With such a law in place, the incentive to not sell any old product to anyone would help root out a lot of these issues we face today. Certain people would not have a 13 gun arsenal in its hands (Authorities say dead suspect had more than a dozen firearms, including six recovered from the crime scene.). Schiff added that current law only protects the "worst actors in the industry," and said that "good gun companies" and I say gun sellers "don't need special protection from the law; bad companies don't deserve it."
Schiff's bill is co-sponsored by 11 other house Democrats, including Budget Committee ranking member Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.). It has been dead since it was placed into action in January 2013. There have been thousands of people killed with guns and bullets since that day.
Schiff also introduced another bill that would create a new, two-year sentence for "straw purchasers" of firearms, or people who are buying weapons for people who cannot pass a background check. He states that "the laws currently on the books targeting straw purchasers of firearms don't treat it as anything other than a paperwork violation." He also states that "we need to crack down on those who are buying weapons with the express purpose of providing them to those who can't pass a background check" and that "straw purchasing is not a 'paperwork' violation — it's a serious crime that has led to a horrendous increase in criminal access to firearms."
Our culture that is geared towards guns is fine to have in America. However, we Americans have lost our responsibility to do it.
CNN reported the other day about American deaths in terrorism vs. gun violence which they spelled out to everyone in one graph:
*Includes the following domestic terrorism incidents:
September 11 attacks (NY, DC, PA) 9/11/01
2001 Anthrax attacks (DC, NY, CT, FL) Oct., Nov. 2001
El Al counter shooting (California) 7/4/02
Beltway sniper attacks (DC, Mid-Atlantic) Oct. 2002
Knoxville church shooting (Tennessee) 7/27/08
Pittsburgh police officers killed (Pennsylvania) 4/4/09
Tiller abortion clinic (Kansas) 5/31/09
Holocaust Museum shooting (DC) 6/10/09
Fort Hood shooting (Texas) 11/5/09
Plane crash into Austin IRS building (Texas) 2/18/10
Fort Stewart Army base killing (Georgia) 12/10/11
Sikh Temple Shooting (Wisconsin) 8/7/12
St. John's Parish police ambush (Louisiana) 8/16/12
Boston Marathon Bombing (Massachusetts) 4/15/13
LAX Shooting (California) 11/05/13
Think about the money we spend on every year to combat terrorism compared to what we spend every year to combat Gun violence in America.
I ask every reader to understand that simple fact. I ask every reader to think about it that way. Either we need to cut down what we spend on terrorism or we need to have an equalling out affect to happen fast.
This POTUS (Barack Obama) stated the other day after the latest mass shooting was his 15th press release on them.
I must also add that same day 4 people in the city of Philadelphia were killed at the same time this news story broke, yet there was no mention about it on any news outlet, except for the local ones surrounding the city of Philadelphia.
Regardless of that happening in Philly that same day without the media taking hold of it, Obama did say that "the reporting is routine." Obama went on to say that his "response here at this podium ends up being routine, the conversation in the aftermath of it. We've become numb to this." He then went on to ask all news organizations to tally up the number of Americans killed through terrorist attacks in the last decade and compare it with the number of Americans who have died in gun violence.
Accordingly to the writers at CNN, and them using numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, they found that from 2001 to 2013, 406,496 people died by firearms on U.S. soil. (2013 is the most recent year CDC data for deaths by firearms is available.) This data covered all manners of death, including homicide, accident and suicide.
And, that according to the U.S. State Department, the number of U.S. citizens killed overseas as a result of incidents of terrorism from 2001 to 2013 was 350.
In addition, CNN compiled all terrorism incidents inside the U.S. and found that between 2001 and 2013, there were 3,030 people killed in domestic acts of terrorism.* This brings the total to 3,380.
That is not normal how we think about the two issues here. We get free reign to spend whatever to thwart terrorism which I respect, we also have lost so many civil liberties in the process but then again, the same goes to try thwart gun violence. Mat Welch from Reason stated on the real Time With Bill Maher show Friday night that was why initially, that the 'stop and frisk' laws were set in place in most major cities in America. I think in either case that if one has nothing to hide, than it is mostly OK, however for the [people that do have things to hide, it is not good for the likes of them.
There have been 3 lawsuits to attempt to hold gun makers, sellers liable for shootings in 2015 so far. There was a legal complaint set up in Newtown, Connecticut after that horrid shooting and that lawsuit is relating the death of children with violence. The complaint tells about of the dead children throughout it. Jesse Lewis, 6, an only child, loved riding horses. His last meal was an egg sandwich with hot chocolate. Dylan Hockley, 6, loved garlic bread and the moon. His favorite color was purple. Benjamin Wheeler, 6, wanted to be an architect, a paleontologist or a lighthouse keeper. The three died Dec. 14, 2012, when Adam Lanza opened fire inside Sandy Hook Elementary School.
They did the same thing describing the murdered people in Oregon this week when they read the names of those victims. They prefaced every one of them with something they believed in and liked to do. One was an animal activist if I remember correct but regardless of those tactics if you will, the suit had been filed in federal court in Connecticut in January, Soto et al. v. Bushmaster Firearms International, LLC. That is one of several lawsuits making their way through the court that seek money damages from gun shops and manufacturers. However, other than talking about the likes of the victims and what they did for the world, these cases have no weight per se and it is because of a decade-old federal law that I mentioned above (Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act) and that gives the gun industry total immunity to never be sued.
Here’s a look at the law:
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act
President George W. Bush along with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist sign the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which shields the firearms industry from civil lawsuits brought by victims of gun crimes, on Oct. 26, 2005, in Washington. The legislation at the core of gun lawsuits is the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. Signed into law by President George W. Bush and by Dick Cheney in 2005. That law restricts there from being any civil lawsuits set up by crime victims against gun makers and sellers.
It first came about after the DC Killings when there were many law suits filed and therefore, the gun industry challenged a series of setbacks because of them. Among them was a suit brought up in New York City claiming how gun manufacturers and sellers had allowed their weapons to be sold in illegal markets, creating a public nuisance, and 2002 California legislation explicitly allowing suits against gun manufacturers.
The gun industry claimed at that time how civil law suits had cost it more than $100 million, and members of Congress began to voice concern about the fate of military weapon suppliers if the entire industry went bankrupt. “Where will our soldiers get the arms they need to protect our freedoms?” asked Rep. Candice S. Miller, R-Mich., according to the Los Angeles Times. “From France? From Germany?”
The law put the National Rifle Association against gun safety organizations. In the Washington Post that year, it had stated that the legislation “barely pretends to be anything other than a special-interest gimme designed to shield the gun industry from lawsuits.”
The debate was that if gun manufacturers and retailers are not held responsible, who pays when a mass shooting or another gun tragedy happens? It was stipulated back then in 2005.
Then, with the Newtown massacre of those kids and when other mass shootings occurred, was when Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., introduced the Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act. That would then hone in that law enacted in 2005 law by then allowing suits when manufacturers, wholesalers and dealers are negligent in the ways described in this article.
That law “denies the victims of gun violence and their families their day in court, and in doing so it protects the worst actors in the gun industry,” Schiff said.
The current law does include a few exceptions that allow gun manufacturers and retailers to be held liable: (1) when a manufacturer or seller knowingly falsifies federal or state records about the gun (however, it is against the Federal Law to alter or change any Federal Court Document or State Court Document anyway), (2) when a manufacturer or seller sells a gun to someone who they know is prohibited from having a gun (that means nothing without any national background check registry set in place), and (3) when a design defect directly results in property damage, physical injuries or death (which is negated because of the guns are manufactured today and is very hard to prove).
The exceptions of this is in the sates of Connecticut, Wisconsin and Alaska.
Currently, there are three cases being seen today and that were brought forth which are:
1. The Newtown suit
Two years after Adam Lanza went into the Sandy Hook Elementary School to for some reason, killed what were 20 children and six school staff members, the victims’ families announced plans to sue file suit against the manufacturer of the gun Lanza used, a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle. They also added that the shop that sold the gun to Lanza to be part of that suit. The complaint, accuses the manufacturer and the seller total "disregard of the unreasonable risks the rifle posed outside of specialized, highly regulated institutions like the armed forces and law enforcement.” The Plaintiff's stated in the complaint how the gun maker and store owner should have known "that people unfit to operate the weapons would gain access to them." Most notably in that case, the plaintiff's state that, "Bushmaster should have known of the “unreasonably high risk” that the rifle would be used in a mass shooting."
They state how the AR-15 is designed as a "military weapon, engineered to deliver maximum carnage with extreme efficiency,” and that how its design of it features “exceptional muzzle velocity, the ability to accommodate large-capacity magazines, and effective rapid fire.”
Both the Plaintiff's involved in that law suit and The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms industry that happens to be also located in Newtown, have not commented on the lawsuit to any media outlet covering it. The NRA also did not respond to anything with regard to that law suit and let alone about the suit that that they most likely feel should be shielded by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act legislation.
The Newtown case takes a different approach than many other law suits vs. gun sellers and directed at the gun manufacturing industry.
It focuses on negligence by the seller and by the manufacturer. And, it focuses on why we have assault types of weaponry readily available for sale to the general public. The legal angle is how it is negligent to allow assault styled weapons like we use at war and during war's pose a danger to a person not trained to use it. "While other lawsuits have focused on problems with the sale of a gun, this one claims that by introducing the Bushmaster AR-15 gun into the marketplace, the manufacturer should be held liable."
This is the first time this has been raised in any court system. Many legal experts have raised doubts on the lawsuit’s chances of success. Nicholas Johnson, a law professor at Fordham University states that “it’s almost exactly the sort of claim that the legislation was designed to prevent,” I think it keeps the conversation going but at the same time, no one really talks about the suit today. Even the victims families that were interviewed this week on major media outlets never said one word about it.
2. The Badger Guns case
In April this year, a gun lawsuit hit the courts in Wisconsin. The Norberg et al. vs. Badger Guns Inc. et al., is set forth because of injuries occurring when two Milwaukee police officers who were shot in 2009 by an 18-year-old kid named Julius Burton. They tried to pull him over for riding his bicycle on the sidewalk and were somehow shot because of it. The officers say that Badger Guns, is liable because the store should have known it was illegal to sell the handgun to an underage kid at the time. The under aged kid was however, with a friend that happened to be 21 years old. The lawsuit is set up because the gun store owner and sales person should have known that buyer of the gun was the under aged kid which had been stipulated clearly on the purchase slip. On that slip, it was written that the 21-year-old was not the buyer of the gun, let alone would not have been the owner.
The gun shop's defense is that that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act protects it from any liabilities in such a claim.
The officers claim how “it was a straw buy,” and how it's “our contention that there were plenty of legitimate red flags that surround the purchase.”
This Badger Guns gained national notoriety in 2005 when federal data showed it was the nation’s top seller of guns linked to crimes (537 of its guns were recovered by police). In that claim, the Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Jeffrey Conen ruled in favor of the officers in January 2014. It found the claim met one of the exceptions of the legislation, clearing the way for the upcoming trial.
3. A challenge in Alaska
This claim is basically a wrongful death lawsuit. In 2006, Simone Kim was fatally shot while painting at a Juneau supermarket. Later, a drifter named Jason Coday was convicted in the killing. The Kim family filed a wrongful death suit, alleging that a gun dealer illegally sold Coday the gun without a proper background check. The lawsuit alleges that Coday went to Rayco Sales and walked out with the gun after putting $200 on the counter as a bribe to be able to get it.
The gun shop owner told a very different story saying that when Coday came into the store, that he wasn’t interested in buying a gun that day. Coday evidently then put on his backpack as if he was going to leave the store, that the seller then walked away from the area. It was told that the gun shop employee saw the $200 in cash on a counter later on, and and he then realized that the gun had been stolen by Coday from the counter. It was also told that the gun seller quickly began to search for Coday and that he was not to be blamed for the bribery and/or the negligence.
Therefore, did Coday steal the gun without the sales clerk's knowledge or was there a bribe in action? Either way, there is negligence but one is willful knowledge and one was just for walking away while guns lay down on the counter with the great ease to swipe. A trial judge eventually dismissed the claim because its ruling was that of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. However, it was appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court that then ruled the case could go forward, saying it was not barred if the gun was sold illegally without the seller doing a background check. It went back to the trial courts in Alaska.
It does turn out that licensed gun dealers have a protection that no other gun dealer has because think about it this way, if someone walks into anyone's house to steal their guns when it is not locked up in a safe manner, and then they take those guns to shoot people or to use it in crimes, whomever can indeed be sued for negligence.
Conversely, if it is a licensed gun dealer, and somebody does that to them, they would be protected by this law.
Overall, this issue needs to dealt with by the root. Which is by law. If we start by fixing that law, we can then start to place together the other pieces of it. Like doing national background checks. Like changing up the gun show loop hole and like to not allow there to be assault weapons sold to the general public. Until then, it will not stop. And, I will realize that no one is serious about gun safety issues.
Because i maintain that any firm believers of that antiquated 2nd amendment (which the forefathers that enacted our amendments wrote them up to be altered and amended; it does not have to be written in stone so to speak like people make it out to be), have lost their privilege today. There is nothing wrong with a responsible gun manufacturer, gun seller and gun user. That's is not what this aimed to be against. It is for the corrupt people. Besides, if "Corporations are People Too My Friends," those corporations that make guns and sell them, should have morals too. It should nit be only about that other Amendment (14th) where it is only about creating as much profits and with as much profit margin as possible. I maintain there should be a moral fiber to that amendment too.
Also and occasionally, a lobbying client may refer to a bill number from a previous Congress, either in error or because they are lobbying on a bill that has not yet been assigned a number. In these cases, it will appear as though they are lobbying on the bill sharing that number in the Congress in which they are filing, which in most cases is a different bill entirely.
To see more information about the bill the client is lobbying on, you can look at the specific report under the "Report images" tab below on the lobbying client's profile page.
Here is a list of them from 2014 at the Center for Responsive Politics:
| Bill Number | Congress | Bill Title | No. of Reports & Specific Issues* |
|---|---|---|---|
| H.R.1565 | 113 | Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2013 | 4 |
| H.R.332 | 113 | Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act | 4 |
| H.R.452 | 113 | Gun Trafficking Prevention Act of 2013 | 4 |
| S.54 | 113 | Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013 | 4 |
| S.649 | 113 | Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013 | 3 |
| H.R.4783 | 113 | Promoting Healthy Minds for Safer Communities Act of 2014 | 3 |
| H.R.4806 | 113 | Pause for Safety Act of 2014 | 3 |
| H.R.4906 | 113 | Protecting Domestic Violence and Stalking Victims Act | 3 |
| S.1290 | 113 | Protecting Domestic Violence and Stalking Victims Act of 2013 | 3 |
| S.2445 | 113 | Pause for Safety Act of 2014 | 3 |
| S.2483 | 113 | Lori Jackson Domestic Violence Survivor Protection Act | 3 |
| Bill Number | Congress | Bill Title | No. of Reports & Specific Issues* |
|---|---|---|---|
| H.R.1217 | 114 | Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act of 2015 | 1 |
| H.R.1701 | 114 | Second Amendment Enforcement Act of 2015 | 1 |
| H.R.1706 | 114 | Real Education for Healthy Youth Act of 2015 | 1 |
| H.R.1885 | 114 | Securing Access to Rural Postal Services Act of 2015 | 1 |
| H.R.224 | 114 | To require the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service to submit to Congress an annual report on the effects of gun violence on public health. | 1 |
| H.R.368 | 114 | Safe and Responsible Gun Transfer Act | 1 |
| H.R.402 | 114 | National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2015 | 1 |
| H.R.410 | 114 | Pause for Safety Act of 2015 | 1 |
| H.R.752 | 114 | Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act | 1 |
| H.R.923 | 114 | Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2015 | 1 |
| H.R.986 | 114 | Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2015 | 1 |
| S.213 | 114 | Look-Alike Weapons Safety Act of 2015 | 1 |
| S.498 | 114 | Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2015 | 1 |
| S.551 | 114 | Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2015 | 1 |
| S.874 | 114 | Second Amendment Enforcement Act of 2015 | 1 |
If you believe that there is an error, please e-mail the Center for Responsive Politics at info@crp.org. They will attempt to correct it.
Regardless of it all happening after the latest mass shooting in America, please stay in touch!
