When you look at the roughly 30,000 annual gun deaths in the US and realize that 20,000 of them are suicides, you begin to see that suicide is a huge problem. Let's deal with that.
Of the remaining 10,000, that number includes justifiable self-defense shootings by civilians and police, gang-related shootings and accidents.
If we can take care of the suicide and gang problem here, our gun death figures would be much more in line with the rest of the world.
I thought the 'remainder' was more along the lines of 16,000 per year?
And don't forget... some of those justifiable self defense shootings are suspect to say the least (Trayvon Martin for example).
Hey man, I said "roughly". LOL!
How about this?: Roughly 2/3 of annual gun-related deaths in the US are suicides.
If hope can grow from dirt like me, it can be done. - EV
All that does is drive the prices of the old stuff up...
Good point. Compulsory gun buyback program.
Australia Main article: Gun politics in Australia
Unlike the voluntary buybacks in the United States, Australian buybacks of 1996 and 2003 were compulsory, compensated surrenders of particular types of firearms made illegal by new gun laws.
The 1996 "National Firearms Buyback Scheme" took 660,959[2] long guns, mostly semi-automatic rimfire rifles and shotguns as well as pump-action shotguns, and a smaller proportion of higher powered or military type semi-automatic rifles. Because the Australian Constitution requires that the Commonwealth may only take private property in return for "just compensation," the Government increased the Medicare Levy, from 1.5% to 1.7% of income, for one year to finance compensation. The buyback was predicted to cost A$500 million.[3] The payments from the Commonwealth were conditional on the States and Territories introducing firearms laws and regulations consistent with the National Firearms Agreement, though some inconsistencies remain. No licences for self-defense are allowed under these laws.
The 2003 handgun buyback took about 50,000 licensed target pistols. New handgun laws made illegal target pistols of greater than .38 calibre and handguns with barrels less than 120mm (semi-automatic) or 100mm (revolvers) such as pocket pistols. As a result of consultation with Australian peak sporting groups an exception was granted for pistols greater than .38 calibre used for Handgun Metallic Silhouette and Western Action competitions, but not for the popular sport of IPSC.[4]
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
When you look at the roughly 30,000 annual gun deaths in the US and realize that 20,000 of them are suicides, you begin to see that suicide is a huge problem. Let's deal with that.
Of the remaining 10,000, that number includes justifiable self-defense shootings by civilians and police, gang-related shootings and accidents.
If we can take care of the suicide and gang problem here, our gun death figures would be much more in line with the rest of the world.
I thought the 'remainder' was more along the lines of 16,000 per year?
And don't forget... some of those justifiable self defense shootings are suspect to say the least (Trayvon Martin for example).
Hey man, I said "roughly". LOL!
How about this?: Roughly 2/3 of annual gun-related deaths in the US are suicides.
A problem for sure.
Honestly, I feel like a broken record saying it too, capitalism has the potential to suck the soul out of society. Not only does it drive foul international policy, but it buries people domestically.
I support it in modified fashion, but left unchecked... it's ruthless. You wonder why people feel detached and hopeless... look no further than the opportunity they are provided.
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
I agree to some extent, but I wouls suggest it's fresher than the routine stream of deaths (hence, the novelty). And, whether you care to admit or not, it's a legitimate concern given the trend- there's people in the ground that can attest to this and... my money says there'll be more.
So one post in your view makes a movement to take guns away from law abiding citizens? Without a chorus of support or a link or quote from the "anti-gun" crowd advocating for it? Who's coming for the guns after Obama leaves office?
Please enlighten me on what laws Oh Canada has in the books regarding firearms and please don't bring up the long gun registry. What's the difference up there? Is it ideology? Better mental health care? Less guns? Ingrained politeness?
Nice job with the jumping to conclusions/Muslim hate things in some of the posts here so far. Let's just round all them fuckers up and hang 'em by the neck and be done with it.
There has been no Muslim hate posts or any suggestion to "round all them fuckers up and hang 'em by the neck". That is the kind of straw man tantrum a person throws in order to avoid a discussion of uncomfortable facts. Sad.
Takes one to know one with your, "take guns away from law abiding citizens" comment. I'm still waiting for a link to just one post that posited what you claim us anti-gunners want.
Here's one post by ident on the thread praising your research:
"I've never been made so sad by looking at a thread list as I just have.
What the fuck.
Take the guns away. Take the bullets away. At this point I don't think it matters anymore."
You asked for one post so I gave you one post. Keep dodging my question about the sensible laws you are advocating for. It is obvious you have none. Don't rage against the machine if you have no proposals of your own.
As far as Canada...the concept of "ingrained politeness" was probably sarcasm but it is closer to the mark then you think. Our two countries are the outcome of different responses to our previous British lords. Americans formed a resistance against tyranny where every settler had to be come a soldier. Canadians pledged their loyalty to the King and gave up many right for his majesties protection. This difference has defined our cultures. Americans are independent minded people who rely on themselves. Canadians on the other hand have for the most part relied on government to care of them.
Or put another way, the myth of the individual rebel against all odds has a powerful hold on the US, while the societies that are healthier for all of their citizens tend to be more interdependent and focused more on the common good.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
I agree to some extent, but I wouls suggest it's fresher than the routine stream of deaths (hence, the novelty). And, whether you care to admit or not, it's a legitimate concern given the trend- there's people in the ground that can attest to this and... my money says there'll be more.
Despite what BS says we still don't know their motives yet. But we do know what guns they used, and how they got them. I think it's more than fair for us to focus on that at this time.
CNN,just reporting ,the wife pledged allegiance to the ISIS leader.They found this on her social media accounts.Attack inspired by other attacks in Europe.
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
Often,I think this is exactly the angle the focus we should be on.
seems like it was the wife: (CNN)[Breaking news update at 10:24 a.m. ET]
As the San Bernardino attack was happening, investigators believe the female shooter, Tashfeen Malik, posted on Facebook, pledging allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, three U.S. officials familiar with the investigation told CNN.
The posting was by Malik made on an account with a different name, according to one U.S. official. The officials did not explain how they knew Malik made the post.
CNN,just reporting ,the wife pledged allegiance to the ISIS leader.They found this on her social media accounts.Attack inspired by other attacks in Europe.
RK,you may be on the $$$ here.
"Once the flame begins to catch, the wind will blow it higher."
The legitimacy of the overall concern is for debate, but I cannot help but wonder to what extent these types of acts will reach? Are these extremist acts slowly accelerating or decelerating? Are they here to stay- something people will just have to accept as a part of life (less likely to die as a result of them versus...) ?
These uncertain questions make me pause for a degree of concern.
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
Of course but we shouldn't avoid the radical islamic terror portion of it also. That is my whole point which is getting lost in the weeds. Some just want to label it straight -up gun violence and look away from the wider war on terror issues.
CNN,just reporting ,the wife pledged allegiance to the ISIS leader.They found this on her social media accounts.Attack inspired by other attacks in Europe.
RK,you may be on the $$$ here.
"Once the flame begins to catch, the wind will blow it higher."
The legitimacy of the overall concern is for debate, but I cannot help but wonder to what extent these types of acts will reach? Are these extremist acts slowly accelerating or decelerating? Are they here to stay- something people will just have to accept as a part of life (less likely to die as a result of them versus...) ?
These uncertain questions make me pause for a degree of concern.
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
Of course but we shouldn't avoid the radical islamic terror portion of it also. That is my whole point which is getting lost in the weeds. Some just want to label it straight -up gun violence and look away from the wider war on terror issues.
This is not just a crazy with a gun.(again)This was an act of terrorism in support of the twisted views of radicalized Muslim wackos.They had a fucking bomb lab,and multiple explosive devices.They wanted more bloodshed.Totally sad all the way around
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
Of course but we shouldn't avoid the radical islamic terror portion of it also. That is my whole point which is getting lost in the weeds. Some just want to label it straight -up gun violence and look away from the wider war on terror issues.
This is not just a crazy with a gun.(again)This was an act of terrorism in support of the twisted views of radicalized Muslim wackos.They had a fucking bomb lab,and multiple explosive devices.They wanted more bloodshed.Totally sad all the way around
You guys are right, we do have to recognize that radical Islamic terrorism is a problem that needs dealt with, and I think it is being treated with appropriate gravity at all the levels it needs to be... The problem is that conservative rhetoric pushes it too far, it is pushed into the realm of Islamophobia, which doesn't produce safety, it produces anti-Muslim violence. That is why you have liberals who resist bold speech about the subject. Mosques are being threatened and vandalized again, though not yet to the severity of the post 9\11 days. If you guys think that the constant rantings about radical Islam from conservative sources isn't a direct contributor to that sort of bigotry, you are just out of touch with what is happening in the conservative circles that are beneath you in class and intelligence.
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
Of course but we shouldn't avoid the radical islamic terror portion of it also. That is my whole point which is getting lost in the weeds. Some just want to label it straight -up gun violence and look away from the wider war on terror issues.
This is not just a crazy with a gun.(again)This was an act of terrorism in support of the twisted views of radicalized Muslim wackos.They had a fucking bomb lab,and multiple explosive devices.They wanted more bloodshed.Totally sad all the way around
You guys are right, we do have to recognize that radical Islamic terrorism is a problem that needs dealt with, and I think it is being treated with appropriate gravity at all the levels it needs to be... The problem is that conservative rhetoric pushes it too far, it is pushed into the realm of Islamophobia, which doesn't produce safety, it produces anti-Muslim violence. That is why you have liberals who resist bold speech about the subject. Mosques are being threatened and vandalized again, though not yet to the severity of the post 9\11 days. If you guys think that the constant rantings about radical Islam from conservative sources isn't a direct contributor to that sort of bigotry, you are just out of touch with what is happening in the conservative circles that are beneath you in class and intelligence.
Very well said my friend. I was flipping back and forth between CNN and Fox news during the night of the recent california shooting and it's amazing how different the questioning is. Fox news kept asking and using words like: was he muslim, he could be muslim, IED factory, bomb factory, post 9/11 world....etc etc.
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
Of course but we shouldn't avoid the radical islamic terror portion of it also. That is my whole point which is getting lost in the weeds. Some just want to label it straight -up gun violence and look away from the wider war on terror issues.
This is not just a crazy with a gun.(again)This was an act of terrorism in support of the twisted views of radicalized Muslim wackos.They had a fucking bomb lab,and multiple explosive devices.They wanted more bloodshed.Totally sad all the way around
You guys are right, we do have to recognize that radical Islamic terrorism is a problem that needs dealt with, and I think it is being treated with appropriate gravity at all the levels it needs to be... The problem is that conservative rhetoric pushes it too far, it is pushed into the realm of Islamophobia, which doesn't produce safety, it produces anti-Muslim violence. That is why you have liberals who resist bold speech about the subject. Mosques are being threatened and vandalized again, though not yet to the severity of the post 9\11 days. If you guys think that the constant rantings about radical Islam from conservative sources isn't a direct contributor to that sort of bigotry, you are just out of touch with what is happening in the conservative circles that are beneath you in class and intelligence.
Very well said my friend. I was flipping back and forth between CNN and Fox news during the night of the recent california shooting and it's amazing how different the questioning is. Fox news kept asking and using words like: was he muslim, he could be muslim, IED factory, bomb factory, post 9/11 world....etc etc.
Thank you. Yeah, they were really pounding the term IED. It's obvious the intent is to bring to mind thoughts of the troops at war, suffering from the afflictions of roadside explosives, and Hannity even verbalized the link. Of course, an intelligent person sees through it, all homemade bombs are IED's. Their special emphasis is a paper thin attempt at stirring the embers of war.
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
Of course but we shouldn't avoid the radical islamic terror portion of it also. That is my whole point which is getting lost in the weeds. Some just want to label it straight -up gun violence and look away from the wider war on terror issues.
This is not just a crazy with a gun.(again)This was an act of terrorism in support of the twisted views of radicalized Muslim wackos.They had a fucking bomb lab,and multiple explosive devices.They wanted more bloodshed.Totally sad all the way around
You guys are right, we do have to recognize that radical Islamic terrorism is a problem that needs dealt with, and I think it is being treated with appropriate gravity at all the levels it needs to be... The problem is that conservative rhetoric pushes it too far, it is pushed into the realm of Islamophobia, which doesn't produce safety, it produces anti-Muslim violence. That is why you have liberals who resist bold speech about the subject. Mosques are being threatened and vandalized again, though not yet to the severity of the post 9\11 days. If you guys think that the constant rantings about radical Islam from conservative sources isn't a direct contributor to that sort of bigotry, you are just out of touch with what is happening in the conservative circles that are beneath you in class and intelligence.
I don't disagree with this at all but when I bring up the same point that some BDS speech results in the targeting of Jews I am told exactly the opposite.
Has Obummer made a statement yet now that we know these "gun nuts" were radical Muslims?
He said he agrees with you and all the muslimhaters they all need to be deported or jailed and that any cops under scrutiny will be pardon ...so your boy who pumped 16 bullets into the 17 yr old will get another desk job with a raise ....
Holy crap!!! I sure hope you don't own any guns. If you are going to throw shots at me personally , atleast know what you are talking about.
If he has said something, I must have missed it being at work all day. I look forward to hearing how Obummer is going 2 spin this one.
How am i taking shots at you ? and no i don't own a gun or any weapon unless the kitchen knives count ....Oh wait i must of mistaking you for someone else who hates the muslims , spanish, blacks , gays , liberals am i forgetting any groups .....
I guarantee I can call more people friends combined in all of those groups of humans than you. I can give 2 Jose's that you don't like me, but lets try to keep it on point on what is really happening in this country w/ these radical Islamic terrorists.
Yeah ok , what kind of cop are you again ?
jesus greets me looks just like me ....
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,936
What is the motive for these shootings? Looks like this was perhaps not directly ISIS related. (And it's worth noting there is still a lot of speculation regarding motive.) My guess would be that the motive ultimately is a tragic end result of Islamophobia. Segregate and show bias against any one one group long and hard enough and bomb their homeland often enough and sure enough, someone is going off the deep end and do something terrible. I'm NOT condoning these acts, of course, just saying maybe we should look at why this kind of thing happens in the first place.
"A law enforcement official said it appeared that Wednesday's attack -- which left 14 people dead and 21 wounded before the two attackers, Malik and her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, were killed in a shootout with police -- may have been inspired by ISIS. But none of the officials said that ISIS directed or ordered the attack. "This is looking more and more like self-radicalization," a law enforcement official said."
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
Of course but we shouldn't avoid the radical islamic terror portion of it also. That is my whole point which is getting lost in the weeds. Some just want to label it straight -up gun violence and look away from the wider war on terror issues.
This is not just a crazy with a gun.(again)This was an act of terrorism in support of the twisted views of radicalized Muslim wackos.They had a fucking bomb lab,and multiple explosive devices.They wanted more bloodshed.Totally sad all the way around
You guys are right, we do have to recognize that radical Islamic terrorism is a problem that needs dealt with, and I think it is being treated with appropriate gravity at all the levels it needs to be... The problem is that conservative rhetoric pushes it too far, it is pushed into the realm of Islamophobia, which doesn't produce safety, it produces anti-Muslim violence. That is why you have liberals who resist bold speech about the subject. Mosques are being threatened and vandalized again, though not yet to the severity of the post 9\11 days. If you guys think that the constant rantings about radical Islam from conservative sources isn't a direct contributor to that sort of bigotry, you are just out of touch with what is happening in the conservative circles that are beneath you in class and intelligence.
I don't disagree with this at all but when I bring up the same point that some BDS speech results in the targeting of Jews I am told exactly the opposite.
I wouldn't refute that some BDS speech results in targeting of Jewish people, but the Bataclan connection is pretty loose, and that's why you took heat.
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
Of course but we shouldn't avoid the radical islamic terror portion of it also. That is my whole point which is getting lost in the weeds. Some just want to label it straight -up gun violence and look away from the wider war on terror issues.
This is not just a crazy with a gun.(again)This was an act of terrorism in support of the twisted views of radicalized Muslim wackos.They had a fucking bomb lab,and multiple explosive devices.They wanted more bloodshed.Totally sad all the way around
You guys are right, we do have to recognize that radical Islamic terrorism is a problem that needs dealt with, and I think it is being treated with appropriate gravity at all the levels it needs to be... The problem is that conservative rhetoric pushes it too far, it is pushed into the realm of Islamophobia, which doesn't produce safety, it produces anti-Muslim violence. That is why you have liberals who resist bold speech about the subject. Mosques are being threatened and vandalized again, though not yet to the severity of the post 9\11 days. If you guys think that the constant rantings about radical Islam from conservative sources isn't a direct contributor to that sort of bigotry, you are just out of touch with what is happening in the conservative circles that are beneath you in class and intelligence.
I don't disagree with this at all but when I bring up the same point that some BDS speech results in the targeting of Jews I am told exactly the opposite.
I wouldn't refute that some BDS speech results in targeting of Jewish people, but the Bataclan connection is pretty loose, and that's why you took heat.
There is a loose jew hatred connection here as well...the work argument MIGHT have been over jewish/islamic politics
The wife (second shooter) Tashfeen Malik had Pakistani passport and was in the US on a K-1 visa. She was fully vetted and yet this happened. More evidence that the verification system is broken.
It is inevitable that in any system that a few criminals will pass through. Pretending that this is a common event is absurd. Of the tens of thousands of gun related homicides that occur in the US each year, how many of them are actually tied to Islamic fundamentalism? Personally I'd be far more fearful of the everyday gun owner than of the ISIS terrorist whom I'm far less likely to ever encounter. Whether you choose to believe it or not, you're more likely to be killed by a gun toting neighbour than dying in a random terrorist attack. cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/
When you are over 100 times more likely to be killed by a random act of gun violence than by a terrorist you have to ask yourself. 'what are you really afraid of'?
I don't think the families of those fourteen dead americans are interested in how common or uncommon these types of attacks are. We should be trying to stop acts of radical islamic terror not because it is common or out of fear but because it is the right thing to do. This is not something we should have to accept as just being part of life.
Shouldn't stopping all the other, far more common forms gun violence, be the right thing to do, too? And if not, why not, since they affect far greater numbers of people?
Yes. Of course. We can do both.
We could, but not by focusing all the attention of the "radical islamic terror" aspect of these incidents.
Of course but we shouldn't avoid the radical islamic terror portion of it also. That is my whole point which is getting lost in the weeds. Some just want to label it straight -up gun violence and look away from the wider war on terror issues.
This is not just a crazy with a gun.(again)This was an act of terrorism in support of the twisted views of radicalized Muslim wackos.They had a fucking bomb lab,and multiple explosive devices.They wanted more bloodshed.Totally sad all the way around
You guys are right, we do have to recognize that radical Islamic terrorism is a problem that needs dealt with, and I think it is being treated with appropriate gravity at all the levels it needs to be... The problem is that conservative rhetoric pushes it too far, it is pushed into the realm of Islamophobia, which doesn't produce safety, it produces anti-Muslim violence. That is why you have liberals who resist bold speech about the subject. Mosques are being threatened and vandalized again, though not yet to the severity of the post 9\11 days. If you guys think that the constant rantings about radical Islam from conservative sources isn't a direct contributor to that sort of bigotry, you are just out of touch with what is happening in the conservative circles that are beneath you in class and intelligence.
I don't disagree with this at all but when I bring up the same point that some BDS speech results in the targeting of Jews I am told exactly the opposite.
The obvious difference being - ISIS advocates violence while the BDS movement is solely focused on non-violent means of activism. Israel's apologists will not tolerate any resistance whatsoever to their occupation and land grabs, so they do what they can to paint all resistors as extremists who foment violence. By your logic, you are culpable for the deaths of thousands of peaceful muslims due to your posts on this forum.
Has Obummer made a statement yet now that we know these "gun nuts" were radical Muslims?
He said he agrees with you and all the muslimhaters they all need to be deported or jailed and that any cops under scrutiny will be pardon ...so your boy who pumped 16 bullets into the 17 yr old will get another desk job with a raise ....
Holy crap!!! I sure hope you don't own any guns. If you are going to throw shots at me personally , atleast know what you are talking about.
If he has said something, I must have missed it being at work all day. I look forward to hearing how Obummer is going 2 spin this one.
How am i taking shots at you ? and no i don't own a gun or any weapon unless the kitchen knives count ....Oh wait i must of mistaking you for someone else who hates the muslims , spanish, blacks , gays , liberals am i forgetting any groups .....
I guarantee I can call more people friends combined in all of those groups of humans than you. I can give 2 Jose's that you don't like me, but lets try to keep it on point on what is really happening in this country w/ these radical Islamic terrorists.
Yeah ok , what kind of cop are you again ?
The kind that acknowledges TERRORISM when he see's it.
What is the motive for these shootings? Looks like this was perhaps not directly ISIS related. (And it's worth noting there is still a lot of speculation regarding motive.) My guess would be that the motive ultimately is a tragic end result of Islamophobia. Segregate and show bias against any one one group long and hard enough and bomb their homeland often enough and sure enough, someone is going off the deep end and do something terrible. I'm NOT condoning these acts, of course, just saying maybe we should look at why this kind of thing happens in the first place.
"A law enforcement official said it appeared that Wednesday's attack -- which left 14 people dead and 21 wounded before the two attackers, Malik and her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, were killed in a shootout with police -- may have been inspired by ISIS. But none of the officials said that ISIS directed or ordered the attack. "This is looking more and more like self-radicalization," a law enforcement official said."
What is the motive for these shootings? Looks like this was perhaps not directly ISIS related. (And it's worth noting there is still a lot of speculation regarding motive.) My guess would be that the motive ultimately is a tragic end result of Islamophobia. Segregate and show bias against any one one group long and hard enough and bomb their homeland often enough and sure enough, someone is going off the deep end and do something terrible. I'm NOT condoning these acts, of course, just saying maybe we should look at why this kind of thing happens in the first place.
"A law enforcement official said it appeared that Wednesday's attack -- which left 14 people dead and 21 wounded before the two attackers, Malik and her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, were killed in a shootout with police -- may have been inspired by ISIS. But none of the officials said that ISIS directed or ordered the attack. "This is looking more and more like self-radicalization," a law enforcement official said."
So explain to me again how the ISIS kind of radical islamic ideology is not a motive when the bitch pledged her allegiance to them during the event? That seems to me to be the exact definition of motive. Radical Islamic ideology (kill kill kill) was a fundamental motive whether she was directly attached to ISIS or not.
Gambsy,I don't disagree at all.I think most common sense folks can see an act of violence,even one that's religiously motivated and not blame everyone who practices that faith.Any retaliation or lashing out due to similar set of criteria is just the stupid people acting without thinking.
Brian,I don't agree with your last statement at all.Of course I can hear your frustration but Islamiphobia as a cause? Nah,That dog don't hunt.Just twisted fuckers with no one but themselves to blame.
Dan-O If it walks like a duck,talks like a duck,and looks like a duck it's probably pretty good bet it's a fucking duck.You know it when you see it.
Gambsy,I don't disagree at all.I think most common sense folks can see an act of violence,even one that's religiously motivated and not blame everyone who practices that faith.Any retaliation or lashing out due to similar set of criteria is just the stupid people acting without thinking.
Brian,I don't agree with your last statement at all.Of course I can hear your frustration but Islamiphobia as a cause? Nah,That dog don't hunt.Just twisted fuckers with no one but themselves to blame.
Dan-O If it walks like a duck,talks like a duck,and looks like a duck it's probably pretty good bet it's a fucking duck.You know it when you see it.
BS,I think to a certain extent you are correct with some of the anti Israel rhetoric being anti Semitic or negative towards Jews I've noticed quite a bit of that on these boards ,but Drowned is kinda right that it's mostly been a political/financial thing not so much the same level of violence.So both fucked up and bad,just not same level.
CNN,just reporting ,the wife pledged allegiance to the ISIS leader.They found this on her social media accounts.Attack inspired by other attacks in Europe.
RK,you may be on the $$$ here.
"Once the flame begins to catch, the wind will blow it higher."
The legitimacy of the overall concern is for debate, but I cannot help but wonder to what extent these types of acts will reach? Are these extremist acts slowly accelerating or decelerating? Are they here to stay- something people will just have to accept as a part of life (less likely to die as a result of them versus...) ?
These uncertain questions make me pause for a degree of concern.
I'm thinking along the lines of those who take a position of respect or just try to blend in to society. People won't suspect them because they are "nice normal people" and then suddenly 'BOOM' they spring it on people. Think of all the psychotic people that did this...serial killers (I knew someone whose mother walked to school with Ted Bundy EVERY DAY "he was such a nice guy!"), pedophiles, rapists, etc. Not that we should suspect everybody is crazy...but it is sad to think that just because someone is 'such a nice person' that they would never do something horrible.
The joy of life comes from our encounters with new experiences, and hence there is no greater joy than to have an endlessly changing horizon, for each day to have a new and different sun.
I guess the landlord of the killers let the media in their apartment and they are having a media orgy right now and going through whatever they can get their hands on ... in an active crime scene!
I guess the landlord of the killers let the media in their apartment and they are having a media orgy right now and going through whatever they can get their hands on ... in an active crime scene!
Unbelievable ....
Do we know that it's still an active crime scene? Someone just showed me that, and I find it hard to believe that they would be doing that if it were. The police already went through the whole place, so it's quite possible that they were done with it. The crime wasn't actually committed there, so....
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Comments
How about this?: Roughly 2/3 of annual gun-related deaths in the US are suicides.
Australia
Main article: Gun politics in Australia
Unlike the voluntary buybacks in the United States, Australian buybacks of 1996 and 2003 were compulsory, compensated surrenders of particular types of firearms made illegal by new gun laws.
The 1996 "National Firearms Buyback Scheme" took 660,959[2] long guns, mostly semi-automatic rimfire rifles and shotguns as well as pump-action shotguns, and a smaller proportion of higher powered or military type semi-automatic rifles. Because the Australian Constitution requires that the Commonwealth may only take private property in return for "just compensation," the Government increased the Medicare Levy, from 1.5% to 1.7% of income, for one year to finance compensation. The buyback was predicted to cost A$500 million.[3] The payments from the Commonwealth were conditional on the States and Territories introducing firearms laws and regulations consistent with the National Firearms Agreement, though some inconsistencies remain. No licences for self-defense are allowed under these laws.
The 2003 handgun buyback took about 50,000 licensed target pistols. New handgun laws made illegal target pistols of greater than .38 calibre and handguns with barrels less than 120mm (semi-automatic) or 100mm (revolvers) such as pocket pistols. As a result of consultation with Australian peak sporting groups an exception was granted for pistols greater than .38 calibre used for Handgun Metallic Silhouette and Western Action competitions, but not for the popular sport of IPSC.[4]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_buyback_program#Australia
Honestly, I feel like a broken record saying it too, capitalism has the potential to suck the soul out of society. Not only does it drive foul international policy, but it buries people domestically.
I support it in modified fashion, but left unchecked... it's ruthless. You wonder why people feel detached and hopeless... look no further than the opportunity they are provided.
RK,you may be on the $$$ here.
(CNN)[Breaking news update at 10:24 a.m. ET]
As the San Bernardino attack was happening, investigators believe the female shooter, Tashfeen Malik, posted on Facebook, pledging allegiance to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, three U.S. officials familiar with the investigation told CNN.
The posting was by Malik made on an account with a different name, according to one U.S. official. The officials did not explain how they knew Malik made the post.
The legitimacy of the overall concern is for debate, but I cannot help but wonder to what extent these types of acts will reach? Are these extremist acts slowly accelerating or decelerating? Are they here to stay- something people will just have to accept as a part of life (less likely to die as a result of them versus...) ?
These uncertain questions make me pause for a degree of concern.
I was flipping back and forth between CNN and Fox news during the night of the recent california shooting and it's amazing how different the questioning is. Fox news kept asking and using words like: was he muslim, he could be muslim, IED factory, bomb factory, post 9/11 world....etc etc.
Yeah, they were really pounding the term IED. It's obvious the intent is to bring to mind thoughts of the troops at war, suffering from the afflictions of roadside explosives, and Hannity even verbalized the link.
Of course, an intelligent person sees through it, all homemade bombs are IED's. Their special emphasis is a paper thin attempt at stirring the embers of war.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/04/us/san-bernardino-shooting/
"A law enforcement official said it appeared that Wednesday's attack -- which left 14 people dead and 21 wounded before the two attackers, Malik and her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, were killed in a shootout with police -- may have been inspired by ISIS. But none of the officials said that ISIS directed or ordered the attack.
"This is looking more and more like self-radicalization," a law enforcement official said."
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/12/was-cali-killer-syed-farook-targeting-jewish-co-worker-nicholas-thalasinos/
By your logic, you are culpable for the deaths of thousands of peaceful muslims due to your posts on this forum.
Brian,I don't agree with your last statement at all.Of course I can hear your frustration but Islamiphobia as a cause? Nah,That dog don't hunt.Just twisted fuckers with no one but themselves to blame.
Dan-O
If it walks like a duck,talks like a duck,and looks like a duck it's probably pretty good bet it's a fucking duck.You know it when you see it.
- Christopher McCandless
Unbelievable ....