You must log in or register to comment.

RB30DETT t1_j74xqh4 wrote

> Boudreaux said all the victims died of gunshot wounds, most were shot in the head, including the 10-month-old boy.

Absolutely brutal.


PointOfFingers t1_j756eed wrote

I think that is why he got into a shootout with police rather than surrender. If he executed a 16 YO mother snd a baby with a shot to the head he is never getting out of prison.


fockyou t1_j75ndc3 wrote

It was the other guy.

>Authorities said Uriarte was injured in a shootout with ATF agents before he was taken into custody. He is hospitalized, and in stable condition, according to ATF Acting Special Agent in Charge Joshua Jackson. Beard was taken into custody without incident.

>Beard is accused of killing 16-year-old Alissa Parraz and her 10-month-old son, Nycholas, as they fled the overnight shooting at a home in Goshen, a farming community about 30 miles southeast of Fresno.


sjfiuauqadfj t1_j75kzhd wrote

this was gang related and the gang the killers are in are a prison gang. dont think being in prison was something they fear as they will have plenty of friends and protection there


fungobat t1_j753mqg wrote

Show the pictures of the aftermath. Maybe, just maybe, that might start to turn the tide.


SohndesRheins t1_j756jct wrote

Turn the tide against what, gangbangers and career criminals?


super_delegate t1_j75sxcz wrote

No one likes this idea but it would work more than anything else imo. If the news showed us what a room for a dead kindergarteners really looked like, it might actually get through peoples skulls.


omen316 t1_j752vxk wrote

They think it might be cartel retaliation as the family was known to rub elbows with gang members. This was a message hit.


peregrinkm t1_j75i0zw wrote

Fuck cartels. Send the military after them at this point.


Tarrolis t1_j76twfu wrote

Yeah I'm all for an outright hemisphere wide take down of these fucking cunts, idc how many civil rights we need to infringe on.


SunsetKittens t1_j7562bb wrote

>The suspects, identified in charging documents as Angel Uriarte, 35, and Noah Beard, 25, are known members of the Norteño gang, Tulare County Sheriff Mike Boudreaux said during a news conference. He said the January 16 shooting was the likely result of a conflict with members of the Sureños, a rival gang.

Nortenos means "northerners". Surenos means "southerners". So the conflict is literally between the northern California gang and the southern California gang.


ImperiumSomnium t1_j75fkzj wrote

They are the street level gang afiliates of the Nuestra Familia and Mexican Mafia prison gangs. But you are correct about the geographic component of the rivalry.


weecefwew t1_j75cson wrote

It’s more convoluted and complicated than that


warmhandswarmheart t1_j754urx wrote

What the fuck is wrong with people.


[deleted] t1_j76bver wrote

No mental healthcare and lots of very powerful guns

And no one is doing shit about it


Witchgrass t1_j76e6t8 wrote

I guess mental healthcare reform would tangentially help reduce gang violence but I think you might be referring to the other kind of mass shooting


[deleted] t1_j76fs47 wrote

I’m referring to all of it. Nothing has been done to stop any of it.


Witchgrass t1_j77tj18 wrote

I agree that more needs to be done. Any ideas?


Mrg220t t1_j75kqzk wrote

> “The suspects and the victims have a long history of gun violence, heavily active in guns, gang violence, gun violence, and narcotics dealings,” Boudreaux said, adding, “the motive is not exactly clear at this point.”

So it's gang on gang violence then? Why frame it as if it's a random shooting?


super_delegate t1_j75t53c wrote

Yea but that’s not that specific, “gang on gang, our work here is done boys”! Obviously there’s more to it, that’s not clear is what the article is saying. Also, it’s a 16yo mom and a 10mo old baby… “gang on gang”. SMH


Imaginary_Medium t1_j7964ak wrote

Only pigs and cowards would murder a little teen girl and a baby. They might think they are men but they are lower than pigs.


Mrg220t t1_j76yp76 wrote

If the 16 year old decided to put her own kid in danger by being in a gang then she's partly responsible for the baby's death.

I have issue with the title of this post. It's framing it as if it's a random mass shooting. When it's not.


shewy92 t1_j772qtq wrote

Jesus dude, you're really victim blaming a 16 year old and her infant getting shot?

And the title doesn't frame it as a random shooting, you're the one framing it as such


Mrg220t t1_j77x533 wrote

I'm blaming the mum for the death of the infant? Of course.

It's her fault to be involved in gangs and to endanger her baby.

Do you not blame parents that put their kids in danger willingly?

The title obviously left out an important part of the shooting which is that both the victims and the perpetrators are gang members.

That's like saying "Thousands of people shot to death in Europe today". Without telling people that it's in the war in Ukraine.


gilbertgrappa t1_j7altg7 wrote

Six people from the same family were killed, but you are blaming the two children? You don’t even know if she was in the gang with her family members or if she was just collateral damage.


shewy92 t1_j772m31 wrote

They're not, as quoted by the same person you quoted later in the article

>“This was clearly not a random act of violence. This family was targeted by coldblooded killers,” Boudreaux said.


Mrg220t t1_j77wzfc wrote

Why wasn't that piece of information in the headline?

Should be "2 arrested in central California gang shooting that left 6 dead." That's it.


shinywtf t1_j76l8b1 wrote

Yeah that baby should have known better


mrrooroo1 t1_j7656ng wrote

I'm good with the death penalty here...


Defacto_Champ t1_j75lj03 wrote

Just an awful situation. Also very confused why a black guy named Noah Beard is running with a Mexican gang?


Boredandtiredbroke t1_j75s7m3 wrote

You don't know NorCal. White,/blacks/somoans/south east Asians/ Latinos all running different cliques of nortenos, crips, skraps, bloods and what have you.

Fresno is central but nothing like SoCal where shit is really homoginist racial wise.


pinkwblue t1_j76gihe wrote

Another one in California. What is wrong with these people ?


JINROH-Scorpio t1_j77gqo6 wrote

No gun control?


pinkwblue t1_j77ildk wrote

There are plenty of therapists you can schedule an appointment with. You don’t need to pull out a gun. However, what I saw in this case the 2 individuals apprehended were out to kill these people. A gun definitely made it easier for them. No matter how hard the laws are criminals will get guns. I remember when President Reagan declared a war on drugs. How many are dying every year from overdoses? If I knew the exactly how to solve both of these problems I would enter politics


TheDollarstoreDoctor t1_j79kad4 wrote

>There are plenty of therapists you can schedule an appointment with.

Maybe I'm just a pessimist, but I think it would take more than private therapy sessions to solve gang violence.

Unless you're referring to group therapy, which the main hurdle would then be getting them all in one room with a therapist who feels safe enough to conduct the session.


pinkwblue t1_j7b4esu wrote

The therapy i was referring to was for individuals. That’s how this started. However , the gang violence you were referring to probably was caused in part by other gang violence like riots in Minneapolis and Portland. These traitors ,as you call them, was tired of burning cities and mass vandalism. Which went on for days or weeks. I agree mass therapy isn’t going to work. But do you think the violence in the 2 cities I imentioned was acceptable ?


TheDollarstoreDoctor t1_j7bfpe3 wrote

What are you on about? This shooting was gang related. I dont think its acceptable but what does any of this have to do with riots? We're talking gangs here, not agent provocateurs. This has nothing to do with Minneapolis or Portland.

>"The suspects, identified in charging documents as Angel Uriarte, 35, and Noah Beard, 25, are known members of the Norteño gang, Tulare County Sheriff Mike Boudreaux said during a news conference. He said the January 16 shooting was the likely result of a conflict with members of the Sureños, a rival gang"


pinkwblue t1_j7bm2yx wrote

Something had to cause people to want to start a rebellion. I think that the events in Minneapolis and Portland both had an impact on the January 6th event. These extreme right wing people, IMO, were fed up. I guess they felt storming the Capitol was how they would get their point across. We both know it was a bad move. Those going to prison now probably think the same thing.


TheDollarstoreDoctor t1_j7bo5n7 wrote

What rebellion? Gangs are not a rebellion.. the only thing you can say they're remotely rebelling/protesting against is their rival gang. This has nothing to do with the Jan 6th Capital riots. Where in the world are you getting these protest/riot claims from? They have nothing to do with this specific situation. Gang violence has always been a problem, for several decades. Gang member starts shooting at other gang members, innocent people sadly get caught in the crossfire or accidentally hit. It's not new, certainly been around longer than the riots you're talking about.


pinkwblue t1_j7boov7 wrote

Are you referring to drug gangs ? Or gangs that vandalized Portland ? Or just referring to January 6 people as a gang ?


TheDollarstoreDoctor t1_j7bpdpo wrote

>Are you referring to drug gangs ?

Yes, the ones named in the article specifically are called the Norteño and the Sureños

>Or gangs that vandalized Portland ?

No. This article doesnt have anything to do with Portland. You were the one that brought that up.

>Or just referring to January 6 people as a gang ?

This article has nothing to do with Jan 6. Again, you were the one that brought that up. QAnon types are more cult-ish rather than a gang anyway, so I personally wouldnt refer to them as a gang. They're more like a dangerous cult.


pinkwblue t1_j7bzskm wrote

So are you as passionate about about the gangs in big cities like Chicago that kill kids? Or just the one that stormed the Capitol. They didnt kill any kids.


JohnWad t1_j753gb0 wrote

Seems like these things are happening once a day now. Damn.


SynkkaMetsa t1_j75h6uv wrote

This happened 10 days ago, this is a follow up story as they finally caught the suspects involved.


fungrandma9 t1_j7bs931 wrote

Its past time to get the gangs out.


SubstantialEase567 t1_j77ehxg wrote

Sons of Anarchy would never. But Twisted Tig would have skinned a bitch alive for this.


Jessica65Perth t1_j75lmfk wrote

As long as the shooters 2nd Amendment rights are protected, that comes before the right to get through life without being shot dead in America yee haa cowboy


kstinfo t1_j75jepo wrote

Any time he wants the President could declare a State of Emergency and enact a temporary ban on the sale of all guns, used and new, commercial and private. Pleas for one-time exemption to be considered.

A state of emergency is a situation in which a government is empowered to be able to put through policies that it would normally not be permitted to do, for the safety and protection of its citizens.

It's not a cure-all but it's something. More than what is being done.


DaanGFX t1_j75xtxw wrote

Thats a great way to start a literal civil war. Christ.


Witchgrass t1_j76ebj3 wrote

Have you considered what the reaction to a move like that might be


kstinfo t1_j76iqsk wrote

Guns are the leading cause of death for children and nobody's doing nothing.

Reaction? Dealers and manufacturers would go nuts. These are the guys who have been profiting from the carnage. They'd be climbing all over each other to implement the strictest background checks, the strictest safety measures, the harshest penalties for abuse, etc.

There's no 2nd Amendment issue here and even this Supreme Court might decide they have no recourse against a State of Emergency. Existing owners and collectors might grumble about slippery slope but no louder than before.

I couldn't find a definitive number of guns legally confiscated in the US but reason would suggest that natural attrition would move us in the right direction.

The fact is there are more guns in private hands in the US than anywhere else in the world. The result is there are more gun deaths in the US than anywhere else in the world. Americans are clearly not mature enough to handle the responsibility.

It's not much, it's not immediate but it's something.


[deleted] t1_j76v8me wrote



Witchgrass t1_j77s5yk wrote

Actually they are right about that. Guns are the leading cause of death for children ages 0-18 per the report the CDC released a few days ago (I think someone else linked it down below). Second is automobile accidents and third is suffocation.


kstinfo t1_j77ed0n wrote

Guns now the leading cause of death for US children, CDC says


[deleted] t1_j77izyj wrote



Witchgrass t1_j77t5mv wrote

I’m 34 and I consider 18 and 19 year olds teenagers. Here’s some more sources if anyone is interested.

I don’t agree with most of what they posted. But they are definitely right about gun deaths being the leading cause of death for younger folks. 2020-2022 saw a huge increase in gun violence, apparently.

The CDC Wonder tool is a great resource where you can get more info on this topic.


[deleted] t1_j76y2nd wrote



kstinfo t1_j77gwjn wrote

There are plenty of "arms" citizens are not allowed to buy.

Just who is going to start and fight your civil war?


Unlawful_Opinion t1_j77jy6b wrote

>There are plenty of "arms" citizens are not allowed to buy.

and that itself is a violation of the 2nd amendment and our natural rights.

"Shall not be infringed" cannot be much clearer but there are still millions of people who think there is room for restriction

banning the sale of guns entirely is something that, for one, almost every state and local government in the country would refuse to enforce. Two, would cause riots around the country. And three, the federal government doesn't even have the power to do that. It was designed that way from the very beginning


kstinfo t1_j77p5k0 wrote

And you skip over the well regulated militia part.


Unlawful_Opinion t1_j77z4w3 wrote

because that is a separate clause, meant in this case to give an example of how the individual right protected in the amendment could be exercised.

Supreme Court Ruling:

"The second amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected with service in a militia, for traditionally lawful purposes."

If you still aren't sure what the original intentions of this amendment were then here are a few quotes from founding fathers, particularly those who were supportive of a bill of rights at the time:

"To disarm the people ... is the most effectual way to enslave them."

-George Mason

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined…. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.” – Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

“The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.” – Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824

“The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” – Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, January 9–February 5, 1788

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes…. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

“I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.” – George Mason, address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788


kstinfo t1_j781usf wrote

You keep hearkening back to the 2nd Amendment and I don't at all agree that it states anyone and everyone can sell a gun. I have a kidney. I am prohibited by law from selling my kidney.


[deleted] t1_j77he0v wrote



kstinfo t1_j77ik28 wrote

That's pretty unspecific. You mean the, for example, the Texas National Guard against the FBI or the US Army. I know who my dollar would be on.

And you? Are you going to sign up? Or are you going to fight the fight from behind your keyboard?


Unlawful_Opinion t1_j77lxed wrote

>And you? Are you going to sign up? Or are you going to fight the fight from behind your keyboard

I mean, you are the one calling for the federal government to do the dirty work and lock down on peoples freedoms nationwide. Can't be less self aware than that


kstinfo t1_j77qmno wrote

" calling for the federal government to do the dirty work "

Yup. That's its job. In the Preamble, condensing the reason for everything that follows, the government's aim and intent is to "establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense".


[deleted] t1_j77napr wrote



kstinfo t1_j77op8y wrote

My way is to protect individuals and children from senseless murder. I have no regrets.


[deleted] t1_j77q0z4 wrote



kstinfo t1_j77rk52 wrote

You think any weapon you can buy will protect you from the government? You poor deluded soul. I'm not suggesting there are not ways to change or influence our government. Just that guns are not one of them.


[deleted] t1_j77t6dc wrote



kstinfo t1_j77zz8l wrote

We don't live in James Madison's world any more. Hell, we don't live in the democracy Madison favored any more.

Jimmy Carter: U.S. Is an ‘Oligarchy With Unlimited Political Bribery’

Your enemy is not the puppets but the puppet masters.


codan84 t1_j76xjop wrote

Can you cite the relevant section of the Constitution that grants such powers to the executive branch?


[deleted] t1_j74yk2k wrote



SohndesRheins t1_j756ojj wrote

Me thinks that the 2 gang members involved in this shooting don't give a damn if they are legally allowed to own guns.


W4ffle3 t1_j75nfdh wrote

Me thinks if guns were rare, hard to obtain, and expensive, they wouldn't have been able to possess guns in the first place.

Why don't gun nuts understand how supply and demand works?


SohndesRheins t1_j75np2y wrote

That strategy hasn't worked for drugs and it didn't work for alcohol during Prohibition.


W4ffle3 t1_j75z196 wrote

I know this is hard for you to understand, but manufacturing a gun requires a lot more skill money and capital then fermenting plant matter.

Also, you realize the world doesn't just consist of America, right? I can easily look at other countries and see their gun laws work.

To sum, your historical example is bad and real world evidence shows gun prohibition works.

Why are all of the arguments from gun nuts so bad? Your analogies are bad and the only history you know is the United States and some bad history about WWII.


SohndesRheins t1_j75zkwt wrote

Maybe this is hard for you to understand, but you can 3D print firearm receivers on your kitchen counter with a $300 printer and a few dollars worth of material. This isn't the 1800s anymore when making a gun yourself meant you had to be named John Moses Browning and have a full machine shop just to make single shot and lever action rifles. Hell a German guy came up with a semi-automatic carbine design that doesn't require any parts you can't get from Home Depot. I would say it's way easier to make your own gun than to make your own cocaine and heroin, but no amount of legislation has made cocaine and heroin go away.


W4ffle3 t1_j78bjrl wrote

This might be hard for you to understand, but 3D printers and supplies are expensive and take technical expertise to set up. Also 3D guns fucking suck.

Do you gun nuts ever think through your arguments? Or do you just uncritically parrot what you read in your discords?


Witchgrass t1_j76ehaa wrote

I think you would have a lot more luck convincing others of your opinion if you didn’t invalidate the opinion of anyone who disagrees with you by calling them gun nuts


hydrophonix t1_j76x0ij wrote

Anti-gun-nuts aren't very smart sometimes.


Witchgrass t1_j77rhpm wrote

As if the only options are all or nothing. There are gun owners (like myself) who aren’t “gun nuts”, who want sensible gun reform. I’m an antifascist who is a proud member of the Socialist Rifle Association. Sometimes I really resent people acting like progressive gun owners aren’t a thing.


[deleted] t1_j751t4z wrote



evidica t1_j7531n9 wrote

They probably also think that the police are here to protect us too.


weecefwew t1_j75d47c wrote

Most “illegal” guns are just guns that were bought legally in the US at some point before getting stolen or trafficked.

The process of acquisition might be more drawn out and illicit but the actual origin of the firearm is pretty much always the same whether it’s a criminal or legal gun owner.


[deleted] t1_j76x5mv wrote



weecefwew t1_j76x8xq wrote

Please feel free to point out anything I said that’s factually incorrect


Skreat t1_j75bqhc wrote

>If I must choose between a law written by men 230 years ago and my life, then I'm choosing my life.

Gang members who executed a 16yr old mother and her baby are not going to care about gun laws.


Exseatsniffer t1_j75zsl5 wrote

Yep, gun laws are not going to do anything in cases like this. But they would have an impact on things like school-and other shootings. Or with in-family killings because someone lost their mind for whatever reason.


hydrophonix t1_j76whke wrote

Lol totally unrelated to the topic at hand


Exseatsniffer t1_j7784su wrote

Dude I commented on mentioned gunlaw so I disagree. I didn't comment on the head topic, I reacted on a sub-comment.


[deleted] t1_j75622p wrote



W4ffle3 t1_j7598je wrote

>The 2nd amendment was written to guarantee your right to protect yourself from these animals.

"You need guns to protect yourself from people with guns."

Galaxy brain argument.


vonhoother t1_j75ebok wrote

The 2nd Amendment was written to satisfy Framers who were afraid of a standing [federal] army and slaveholders who wanted to preserve their right to mount armed patrols to catch people escaping slavery. The standing federal army has been a fact of life for more than two centuries; slavery was abolished in 1865; so the 2nd Amendment is now useful as a fundraising tool for the NRA and the Republican party, and to make domestic violence more deadly.

Today's ultra-simplistic interpretations of the 2nd Amendment are a fraud, as former Chief Justice Warren Burger said. I honestly think Justice Clarence Thomas (author of the Bruen decision, now being cited to restore gun rights to wife-beaters) detests this country and is using his position to destroy it with its own constitution.


kazh t1_j757u28 wrote

I'm in favor of more realistic and modern laws but these people will be armed regardless.


W4ffle3 t1_j75zakc wrote

Everyone is in favor of realistic and modern laws on paper. Now man up and say what you actually mean. What laws? Universal background checks? Assault rifle bans? Red flag laws?

What do you actually mean?


heroini t1_j751ods wrote

>If I must choose between a law written by men 230 years ago and my life, then I'm choosing my life.

*Dies in home invasion*


Roberttrieasy t1_j75oby4 wrote

yeah I'm sure klan members will be stopped by the pleading words of the black family they're terrorizing


FamiliarTry403 t1_j751x2f wrote

I’m all for safe storage laws, red flag laws, more extensive background checks, and things like that, actually enforcing all of those things is easier said than done. I believe tho abolishing the 2nd amendment will do more harm than good. Gun buy backs will only be so effective even with cash incentive, people still have the means to manufacture their own firearms that laws can’t fully stop, you have more guns than people that would have to be accounted for and that’s just the legal firearms. It’s a mess through and through tho.


SynkkaMetsa t1_j75gu7y wrote

So 3 things to start, 1 safe storage laws, mostly unconstitutional under Heller v DC (and with NYSPRA v Bruen almost likely so), red flag laws, extreme grey area on 4th amendment rights if not implemented properly (and with the 5th circuit ruling that restraining orders are not a means to take guns...well, red flags may be analogous given they are somewhat similar in the approach, but we'll see how that plays out if the AG appeals higher) , more extensive background checks... the background things checked on the background check are all good, the issue is localities failing to turn information over to the FBI. And any extended background check that takes a few days to complete...well they don't do anything, they just run NICS as usual and sit around and make it a wait-period law instead.

Also gun buybacks are hilarious to me, they are basically "hey, I'll give you $100 for that $2000 gun you got" because apparently the legislatures think it is <2000's still in terms of gun, nahhh, and then people 3D print firearms to show how much of a joke the whole thing is anyway.

Not trying to be snarky, just pointing out the reality of all these things. We'd likely be better off trying an approach which doesn't affect 2A or any of our other rights...because apparently politicians don't get that, we are at the point where they are purposefully testing the boundaries knowing it is a grey area (and in some cases knowing 100% that they are attacking a right), and that's not good for any of our rights.

Tangent: I wish I could say that they truly believed it was about safety...but I've read so many of their proposed bills, it is not about safety, they simply hate gun owners just like you see with people here on reddit which clearly have a bias against gun owners, so why would politicians be any different, they are after all, just people, and like people, are influenced by those around them.


xavis t1_j75jr5s wrote

reddit associates gun owners with being republicans (because they are the vocal ones about guns), and just see anti gun laws as punishing republicans.

because a liberal would never own a gun. no siree bob.