Mass shooting in San Bernardino, CA

[wizards8507]

I'm not trying to make a political statement or have a political debate, but I have to say that this cannot keep happening. I don't know the answer. I just know I'm sick of hearing about these shootings, and I am sick that we aren't better than this. If everyone were as sick of it as I am, then we would figure out a way to stop this from happening - if not completely then at least far less frequently.

I really really wish that were true, but people slaughtering each other is as old as people.

 

[Circa]

The first person to politicize this was President Obama, who was calling for gun control as early as 4:30ish ET. Me observing how others are politicizing this is not, in itself politicizing it.

This in and of itself is about politicizing as a response. I never usually stick up for Wooly.

 

[Circa]

I really really wish that were true, but people slaughtering each other is as old as people.

and trees
<iframe src="//giphy.com/embed/l41lSh8C2E39fzuta" width="480" height="297" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="http://giphy.com/gifs/nbaontnt-shaq-inside-the-nba-on-tnt-l41lSh8C2E39fzuta">via GIPHY</a></p>




Trees are old.

 

[pkt77242]

I had read that the shooters were targeting whatever group was holding a gathering inside the facility not the actual employees themselves. That would make me think workplace violence is unlikely. But who knows at this point.

Huh? If it was terrorism wouldn't they have been more likely to kill indiscriminately? Isn't the fact that they targeted those people specifically make it more likely that there is some kind of beef there (workplace or personal)?

 

[Rhode Irish]

I really really wish that were true, but people slaughtering each other is as old as people.

That's a questionable statement, but regardless we are the only civilized country where this happens with such depressing regularity.

 

[wizards8507]

That's a questionable statement, but regardless we are the only civilized country where this happens with such depressing regularity.

That's not true. We're not even top five when you control for population size.

 

[Redbar]

I really really wish that were true, but people slaughtering each other is as old as people.

That's not true. We're not even top five when you control for population size.

Yeah, c'mon Rhode, pull yourself together man, this isn't a problem at all, this is what it means to be human. Don't let the media pull you in with their spin. We can't change our world, this is just how we roll.

 

[pkt77242]

That's not true. We're not even top five when you control for population size.

Care to list the other countries? Are they 1st world countries?

 

[phgreek]

Too early to tell, but I'm actually leaning toward workplace violence. Saw his twitter account, and he seemed like he was focused some on backlash from terror attacks...taking shit for being Muslim after France. Maybe its set up to give that impression and all, but based on what they did...seemed they were aimed at his coworkers, etc.

No matter the motivation, doubt this will be real clear as one or the other of workplace violence or terrorism.

As for the damned gun issue...you have to trust the other side to leave it alone once you come to some common ground...

As well, many on the Second Amendment side see a number of other issues that need dealt with...a good will gesture might be to move on those first. Want to control things, control how much time people can play violent games, or how often they need checked when they do, and start to develop a holistic way to determine/classify exposure groups to violent inputs, and better understand them. Hint... the rise in pornography has little to do with sexuality, or even Darwin, and way more to do with self-centered entitled attitudes...combine that with isolation, now add in repetitive violent stimulus... Your problem is lack of empathy and perspective. Do something real on the issues that matter most and I'd be willing to discuss controlling aspects of guns, access, ammunition...but I'm not willing to lead with that, because that is the LEAST important part of the discussion...

 

[drayer54]

I'm fine with concealed carry, but semi-automatic rifles and such were not around when the Bill of Rights was drafted. Back then, if you wanted to wreck shit in a school for example, good luck reloading your musket. I mean the image is almost comical, some jackass trying to bite powder and stuff it down the barrel... I guess what I'm saying is the "but the 2nd Amendment gives us rights to guns!" holds about no weight with me.


((I also don't get the fools who thinking they're "the last defense against government oppression and tyranny!"

I would argue that this is exactly the reason we have the 2nd amendment . The founders didn't envision forums or Facebook, so does free speech need not apply there? They probably didn't think about weird religions or an Air Force either. If the intent is to protect the right to fight tyranny, then why would you limit the people to the weakest tools? We had no issue throwing tons of automatic rifles into Syria to help them fight Assad...

This is dumb on so many levels. For one, the government has drones, so good fucking luck. Soon they'll (publicly) have all sorts of autonomous tanks and shit too. So, again, ya ain't stoppin' shit all you George Washington Wannabes.

I'm impressed by your psychic abilities and future wartime planning skills. You can choose to sit out (and I likely would too), but that doesn't mean that these tools should be taken away. I would also interpret this as a basic right to self defense. Waiting 5-7 minutes for a law enforcement officer who is going to shoot anything he thinks is scary is not my preferred method of home defense.

Additionally the military is all-volunteer and consists of many of the most patriotic Americans, so take a chill pill. But I will add it was deeply troubling that the people most likely to be loud and proud about government oppression also got right in line as the Patriot Act was passed and, more recently, were silent as news stories of government officials killing an alarming number of innocent citizens came out in the last year or so.))

Most of those veterans that I know (like myself) who are familiar with weapons and understand them, get the same headache when we hear about gun control.

I'm with you on the Patriot Act, but isn't this on the same line?

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

I hated the Patriot Act from day 1. It's evidence that we shouldn't pass laws when emotions are still running high from terrible events. But isn't banning the scary looking guns is just another dumbass idea to make people feel safer at the expense of freedom?

In the conversation of what to do about handguns and hunting rifles, an overwhelming majority of Americans want common sense regulations. If you want to buy a gun, take the damn class and register that shit. Hell they should make you buy a gun safe too.

Gun registration only serves one purpose and it's the one that the liberals always say it's not what they are trying to do. I'm sure the criminals will line up to register anyways. ("Common Sense"). Common sense tells me not to pass laws to stop violence that do nothing to stop violence. Most states require training for a carry license and the evil NRA is a huge advocate of gun safety training. Forcing people to buy a product is another issue, but responsible gun owners lock that stuff up.

Systemic poverty, the drug war, radical Islam, radical anything, and mental health issues are the real problems. But the idea of any jackass walking around with an AR-15 is unsettling. James Madison and Co could barely comprehend such a weapon. Automatic? Smokeless? Rifling? Magazines? Dafuq.

I never liked the idea of people carrying the AR's out in public. It's obnoxious and yes, a bit unsettling. The gun serves a purpose and isn't even that dangerous in comparison to many other guns that never come up in the "That's scary, ban it!" pushes. I don't think the James Madison would have supported anything along the lines of gun control. However, our country has never assessed freedoms on what the founders envisioned in 2015.

 

[pkt77242]

Too early to tell, but I'm actually leaning toward workplace violence. Saw his twitter account, and he seemed like he was focused some on backlash from terror attacks...taking shit for being Muslim after France. Maybe its set up to give that impression and all, but based on what they did...seemed they were aimed at his coworkers, etc.

No matter the motivation, doubt this will be real clear as one or the other of workplace violence or terrorism.

As for the damned gun issue...you have to trust the other side to leave it alone once you come to some common ground...

As well, many on the Second Amendment side see a number of other issues that need dealt with...a good will gesture might be to move on those first. Want to control things, control how much time people can play violent games, or how often they need checked when they do, and start to develop a holistic way to determine/classify exposure groups to violent inputs, and better understand them. Hint... the rise in pornography has little to do with sexuality, or even Darwin, and way more to do with self-centered entitled attitudes...combine that with isolation, now add in repetitive violent stimulus... Your problem is lack of empathy and perspective. Do something real on the issues that matter most and I'd be willing to discuss controlling aspects of guns, access, ammunition...but I'm not willing to lead with that, because that is the LEAST important part of the discussion...

How do you know that those matter most?

Wouldn't it be better to start by allowing the CDC to study gun violence?

 

[GATTACA!]

Huh? If it was terrorism wouldn't they have been more likely to kill indiscriminately? Isn't the fact that they targeted those people specifically make it more likely that there is some kind of beef there (workplace or personal)?

Idk my thought was that it was just chosen because it was a large group of people all corralled in one conference room.

 

[NDdomer2]

On the WPV/Terrorism:

Could be both.

Hypothetical:

Lady gets fired from work, and goes home to radical husband and his radical brother who have been itching to do something radical.

This creates a terrorism/wpv incident.

Target his wife's work/coworkers because she was shitcanned, but husband/bros motives are truly an act of terror.

Just spitballin.

 

[Booslum31]

It looks like the robot has been removed from the work force violent guys house.

 

[Rhode Irish]

That's not true. We're not even top five when you control for population size.

OK, I'll play. Who are the top five then? (Note that I am talking about rich, civilized countries. I'm not trying to hear about banana republics in South America or in Africa or something.)

 

[NDdomer2]

OK, I'll play. Who are the top five then? (Note that I am talking about rich, civilized countries. I'm not trying to hear about banana republics in South America or in Africa or something.)

If you are going to put a qualifer on what countries he can use, generalities of "Rich" should be defined. What is your national GDP cutoff?

 

[phgreek]

How do you know that those matter most?

Wouldn't it be smarter to start by allowing the CDC to study gun violence?

ok...yes of course, more data is good. I get what you are saying.

But that does not preclude the things we already know. We know guns are a tool. Lack of empathy and perspective...those are the problem.

Do you know when I understood when people were getting serious about managing occupational risk...and stopped treating employees like a renewable...when they started spending money to define exposure groups, and studied health risks, developed mitigation, and remedies.

Same holds true here...I'll know this isn't political bullshit whims when people start to see things like porn, violent games, and many other things as exposures, and start to force the people who put it out to bear the cost of making sure that shit isn't screwing us up...and yea in this regard I sound liberal, maybe I am.

What I am not going to do is accept a stupid inanimate object as the problem. And if you think it is hard to make a freaking pressure cooker bomb...WHATEVER. How hard is it to buy already pressed pure gun powder (sold cheaply for black powder hunters)...how hard is it to purchase nails...how hard is it to buy a timed ignition (hoby rocket)...what if they throw in unopened bottles of bleach and ammonia...I'm not even that smart and I could build something pretty damned devastating in a day without needing to order exotic shit online. Grocery store, hobby store, local hunting supply store, hardware store...Boom.

STOP with the gun narrative, its bullshit...entitled, isolated, victimy, angry people got nothing but time, and they will do bad shit. Need to focus on them. If thats what we are doing with the CDC...tell the NRA to f off and do the study.

 

[IrishinSyria]

Gun registration only serves one purpose and it's the one that the liberals always say it's not what they are trying to do.

I know you're implying that it's confiscation, but really it's just holding people accountable for where their guns end up being used. If every sale is registered, you create a chain of custody (like when you signed your M4 or whatever out from your unit armorer). Your gun ends up being used in a crime and you didn't report it stolen or report a legal sale? Police have a trail.

Obviously, this would not be a panacea, but it would be a start.

 

[Booslum31]

JTTF is now involved.

 

[drayer54]

I know you're implying that it's confiscation, but really it's just holding people accountable for where their guns end up being used. If every sale is registered, you create a chain of custody (like when you signed your M4 or whatever out from your unit armorer). Your gun ends up being used in a crime and you didn't report it stolen or report a legal sale? Police have a trail.

Obviously, this would not be a panacea, but it would be a start.

I don't think that is so far off what we have now. Private gun sales should have a bill of sale anyways. I'm not sure what gain comes from that. I can see the huge pain in the ass from that. Plus, what happens with the data and information. Plus, yes... the government knowing who has what.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

But that's the same old tired argument made against guns. And that type of debate just won't take off in America. Guns is simply a symptom of a more far reaching issue. If we stop at the symptom, the real issues never get addressed.

While I don't think anyone in their right mind needs to own a Barrett 50 cal, I also understand the desire to keep gun ownership a fundamental right of all law abiding citizens that choose to own a gun. Tougher laws I am all for. Making guns illegal I would fight till my death.

And this is a common strawman response.

No one is arguing to ban guns. At least no one that I've heard. There is an argument to study the problem, require background checks, require training, require that all gun sales are tracked, etc. This is why I think we could actually have a conversation. You and I wouldn't agree on the final result completely, but we have some common ground. Let's find the common ground and legislate it. As it currently stands, we ANY gun legislation is viewed as an anathema.

 

[Irish#1]

Don't we have a thread to debate gun control? It'd be nice to discuss what has happened in SB and whatever the future brings for this unfortunate incident without discussing the right to own a gun.

 

[kmoose]

If you are going to put a qualifer on what countries he can use, generalities of "Rich" should be defined. What is your national GDP cutoff?

Whatever makes the US the #1 on the list. It's funny how no one ever says, "We're the only RICH WHITE CIVILIZED INDUSTRIALIZED country where shit like this happens!"

 

[irishff1014]

First off guns aren't the problem. People are the issue here just like every other shooting. I personally don't have an issue with a right to carry a hand gun. Rifles,shotguns,muzzloaders are fine as well to shot clay skeet, hunt and so on. I think the aks are more concerning to me. I also believe that CA already banned assault style guns and extended clips. So I am glad these 3 got the message.

I think there is more to this then work place violence. I have never been so mad that I wanted or thought about going home then coming back to kill someone. They are cowards. People don't care about other people anymore. I agree that strong back grounds checks are needed and will help. If we stop 3 people a year from buying a guy that had the potential to go on a shooting spree we as a nation WIN.

 

[Bugzly21]

I'm fine with concealed carry, but semi-automatic rifles and such were not around when the Bill of Rights was drafted.

Incorrect. Don't know how to put a picture but it's called the Puckle Gun
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puckle_gun

 

[wizards8507]

Apparently they knew this was Islamic terrorism within the first hour, which is why the FBI was there right from the beginning, and they decided to cover it up. CNN wouldn't even say the name Syed Farook until two hours after it came out. We're sitting here talking about the NRA and gun control but nobody in the administration or media will utter the words "Islamic terrorism."

Also note that the original reports were that there were "two or three shooters, all white males." They had their fingers crossed it was a group of white Christians because that would have fit The Narrative (TM).

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Apparently they knew this was Islamic terrorism within the first hour, which is why the FBI was there right from the beginning, and they decided to cover it up. CNN wouldn't even say the name Syed Farook until two hours after it came out. We're sitting here talking about the NRA and gun control but nobody in the administration or media will utter the words "Islamic terrorism."

Source?

 

[dublinirish]

the strangest thing was when the FBI guy said on TV "these aren't terrorists, they are americans" WTF like..

 

[goldandblue]

Source?

Do you not believe this is an act of terrorism?

 

[kmoose]

Apparently they knew this was Islamic terrorism within the first hour, which is why the FBI was there right from the beginning, and they decided to cover it up. CNN wouldn't even say the name Syed Farook until two hours after it came out. We're sitting here talking about the NRA and gun control but nobody in the administration or media will utter the words "Islamic terrorism."

Also note that the original reports were that there were "two or three shooters, all white males." They had their fingers crossed it was a group of white Christians because that would have fit The Narrative (TM).

Lets not get caught up in "Islamic Terrorism" vs. anything else. Let them investigate, then see what is obvious or hopefully is a clear motive. I'm not excusing anyone purposely avoiding the term, but there's really not enough info to make an educated guess.