Orlando attack - terrorism suspected

[phork]

The Truth About Assault Weapons

Just some food for thought.

Forgot to quote you to. They are semi-automatic until people modify them to be fully automatic. So thats a start. Make it illegal to modify these guns in any way.

 

[Bubbles]

Forgot to quote you to. They are semi-automatic until people modify them to be fully automatic. So thats a start. Make it illegal to modify these guns in any way.

It already is illegal to modify the firing mechanism to make it full auto. The only way to have a full auto is to purchase a pre-ban gun or a pre-ban auto sear to drop into a new gun.

the bump fire crap is both unreliable, difficult to control and most importantly, not full auto.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

When the kid waving the Confederate flag shot up the black church last year, we were all supposed to burn the Confederate flag, take down statues of Confederate generals, and dig up the graves of Confederate veterans. Now, though, we aren't supposed to even mention "Islam," the obvious cause of all of this, because it is inconvenient for the Democratic coalition. Absurd.

And about Islam: can you please specify which actions ISIS takes that Muhammad either (a) did not engage in himself or (b) would have clearly disapproved of? I cannot. Therefore I cannot say that ISIS's interpretation of its religious duties are incorrect interpretations of Islam.

Yeah, holy books say some crazy things.

And I'm not sure that the Confederate States, a group that existed for roughly 4 years, in large part to maintain the rights of white citizens to own slaves, is analogous to a religion that has existed since the 6th or 7th century.

 

[NorthDakota]

Whiskey the point of my posts, with videos, is to show that they can be made automatic or close to it very easily. My solution is to make it illegal to do so. There is NO reason why you need a fully automatic weapon. There is nothing wrong with hunting rifles at all. In fact if you were to go on a rampage with a hunting rifle you would kill people, but not a whole lot of people.



And do you want to know why people dislike Americans around the world?

Both of these are google images of Ruger .22 rifles. I think you are intimidated by the appearances of "military-style" rifles vs. hunting ones.

I don't care if people don't like Americans. I'm curious why they move here if that's the case.

 

[Buster Bluth]

The enemy isn't radical Christianity, radical Buddhism, or Hinduism, or Judaism. All the SOB's doing this shit are praising Allah and waging jihad in the hope of entering paradise.

Actually I would consider all of those things my enemy and the enemy of the world's greatest secular power.

 

[Buster Bluth]

I understand the point but the weapon of choice is a red herring. The issue here is Islam and whether it can co-exist with the western world.

Didn't one of the most famous athletes in history die last week after showing people that it was a definitive "yes" to your second statement?

I am in line to criticize widespread immigration of people who don't follow the western prerequisites (eg freedom of and from religion, freedom of speech, equality among men and women, straight and gays, all races, etc), but let's also accept the fact that most of us have interacted with Muslims in this country who are just fine.

 

[Buster Bluth]

As for worrying about your kids, events in the past 15 years tell us you should be less worried about a nutjob on a bad day with an AR-15 and more worried about someone waging jihad on the West in a train station, school, nightclub, etc.

...and be even more worried about being crushed to death by your own furniture, because that's more likely than dying in a terrorist attack.

 

[Wild Bill]

Didn't one of the most famous athletes in history die last week after showing people that it was a definitive "yes" to your second statement?

I am in line to criticize widespread immigration of people who don't follow the western prerequisites (eg freedom of and from religion, freedom of speech, equality among men and women, straight and gays, all races, etc), but let's also accept the fact that most of us have interacted with Muslims in this country who are just fine.

I think reasonable minds can agree Ali is far different than a middle eastern or African Muslim, though he had some interesting views on racial diversity.

I've already stated that assimilation is possible, but I don't believe it's probable.

 

[yankeehater]

I obviously think that's terrible. But there are millions of Muslims in this country and around the world who don't think that.



I know. And they are horrible, terrible people who are fitting their radical ideas into a religion.

I disagree with George Bush on many things. But he was right about this one.

Why President Obama Won't Use the Term 'Radical Islam' - ABC News

I posted this in the 2016 Presidential thread before i read this. Your number may be right about the number of Muslims who do not believe, but the number who do even in this country is significant and alarming.

Center for Security Policy President, Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., observed:

The findings of the Center for Security Policy’s survey of Muslims in America suggests that we have a serious problem. The Pew Research Center estimates that the number of Muslims in the United States was 2.75 million in 2011, and growing at a rate of 80-90 thousand a year. If those estimates are accurate, the United States would have approximately 3 million Muslims today. That would translate into roughly 300,000 Muslims living in the United States who believe that shariah is “The Muslim God Allah’s law that Muslims must follow and impose worldwide by Jihad.”

 

[phgreek]

Yeah, the whole "protect against a tyrannical government" argument on the Second Amendment is just ridiculous.

You go ahead and protect yourself from a tyrannical government with your AR-15.

Get it out, load it, try to dial in your sites. Meanwhile, that drone above cloud cover that's got your whole block targeted is just gonna keep circling...


The point is that we don't need guns to protect ourselves from the government. They wouldn't help anyway.

There are plenty of arguments for the 2nd Amendment. But that one is by far the worst (and most useless).

That's it for me on the topic.

I'm not tipped over about guns and the protection against tyranny thing...I mentioned it earlier in response to something...like if tyranny is your reason to want guns, you'd certainly see a standing army as MORE of a reason to own an AR...not less of a reason...I think. As well Tyranny comes in many shapes and sizes of government. Then ...well emotion, arm waving...Tanks, Drones, and ICBMs...blah, blah, blah...gubament would kick yur butt...LMAO. Its just ...anyway.

Those Bundy guys kinda did exactly what the "gubament kick ur butt" folks are saying would get you rolled...I think they had ARs at one of those confrontations...yes? Pointed them at Federal agents...yes? Backed the Federal agents down...yes? Because they claimed the government was being...tyrannical...yes? So...when I see the tanks roll in on a Bundy type (who probably deserved it) and fire, or a drone strike, I'll take the "gubament kick ur butt" folks more seriously. But lets not kid ourselves here. The government isn't going to pull any Koresh type shit. They can't win in that scenario...and could cause a mushrooming response (particularly in the west) so they wisely choose tax and legal means...so folks just need to stop with the "gubament kick yur butt" shit...seriously, it is just too much like kids on a playground talking shit they know NOTHING about.

 

[phgreek]

Sounds like Canada needs a wall

crap...I knew it...we gotta pay for it don't we

 

[Legacy]

I agree that there are similarities. Mateen's case is especially complicated because it's hard to pin-point what drove him to kill. Was it Islamism? Homophobia? Easy access to weaponry? Mental illness? He was also a first generation Afghani Pashtun, whose culture includes a very complicated relationship between Islam and homosexuality.

But the violence perpetrated by insane people like Dear is fundamentally different from that involved in San Bernadino or Fort Hood. Even if there are common lessons to be learned regarding gun control, conflating the two forms of violence is dangerous and counter-productive, as it makes it harder for us to address the latter (and far more dangerous) sort.

And it should be self-evident why comparing the pro-life movement's capacity to "radicalize" to that of ISIS is absurd on its face.

Glad you could see the similarities, too. I'm not equating the pro-life movement to any terrorist organization just so that's clear, too. Since we're talking of an individual's motivations, your link to the First Things article differentiates motivations for violence is distilled down to hate (abortion clinic murders at least in Dear's case, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold) vs terrorism (Orlando, San Bernadino, Fort Hood).

If "conflating the two forms of violence is dangerous and counter-productive", then it's counter-productive and dangerous for Ryan - and any others - to push for mental health reform after such a terrorist act, even if the bill has been stalled in Congress for years since Columbine and Newtown, etc. The conclusion must be that not only is mental health reform needed and only possibly related to Orlando, but that Ryan - and others - have no other solution to individual acts of terror committed by radicalized elements within America that see our military actions as jihad against their religion.

As a matter of clarification on your stats, since 1977 at abortion clinics there have been 17 attempted murders, 383 death threats, 153 incidents of assault or battery, 13 wounded, 100 butyric acid attacks, 373 physical invasions, 41 bombings, 655 anthrax threats, and 3 kidnappings committed against abortion providers as well as 9 murders since 1990. Again, I am not equating those hate crime acts with the pro-life movement. After the three murders in 1994 in Boston, for instance, Boston's Bernard Cardinal Law called the acts ""unconscionable violence.". Similarly, I am not equating all Moslems as jihadists. Of course, nine murders, seventeen attempted murders, etc. does not come close to the fifty murders and innumerable attempted murders by the terrorist act in Orlando.

As always, I appreciate your contributions and your links, Whiskey - any solutions you propose to the status quo that address the causes of terrorists' acts.

Biometrics for weapon activation, increased waiting periods, elimination of internet sales, enhanced screening and follow-ups, metal detectors in all potential soft targets, gun control issues shifting to local and state authorities, etc., etc. What is productive and not dangerous??

 

[IrishLax]

I woud rather someone use a knife than a fully automatic rifle, if you can't see the logic there then I can't help you.
Again no one said to ban anything. We are trying to have a discussion about the problem and solutions to it. But some people clearly can't debate or carry on rational conversation without slinging mud and telling people that their opinion doesn't matter.
As for fertilizer I believe that after OklahomaCity any large purchases came under scrutiny.

You are right, are these guys going to try stuff? Yup. But again, why make it EASY for them to do?

Because the point is that "easy" is always relative and where there's a will there's a way. So let's say you have very strict prohibitions on guns like Paris. Did that stop the terrorists from using guns the last time around here? No. Did the Boston Marathon bombers need guns? No. Did the 9/11 terrorists need guns? No.

So making it "hard" is absolutely going to curb gun fatality rates. That's why I support pretty much every type of gun control ever presented. It's going to save lives.

Is it going to prevent or even mitigate Islamic terrorism? There is no evidence that it will, especially with how prevalent explosives have always been in that line of work. And that's why the entire discussion centering on "preventing things like Orlando" seems... odd. To be fair, this thread is much more nuanced than, say, my Facebook feed.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

Because the point is that "easy" is always relative and where there's a will there's a way. So let's say you have very strict prohibitions on guns like Paris. Did that stop the terrorists from using guns the last time around here? No. Did the Boston Marathon bombers need guns? No. Did the 9/11 terrorists need guns? No.

So making it "hard" is absolutely going to curb gun fatality rates. That's why I support pretty much every type of gun control ever presented. It's going to save lives.

Is it going to prevent or even mitigate Islamic terrorism? There is no evidence that it will, especially with how prevalent explosives have always been in that line of work. And that's why the entire discussion centering on "preventing things like Orlando" seems... odd. To be fair, this thread is much more nuanced than, say, my Facebook feed.

I agree with the broad statement that we may never be able to totally prevent mass homicide in this country. Mainly because like you said, where there's a will, there's a way. But I think the focus should be on your second paragraph: Gun control in order to curb the fatality rate. The argument from the pro-gun community that irks me to no end is that all citizens have the right to bear arms. But to me, that right should be forfeited if one is deemed unfit, untrustworthy, unstable, etc during the vetting process. Matteen would've have failed to legally obtain any weapon, given his past, in some other countries with stricter purchasing laws. Domestic violence, steroid abuse, bigotry, threats, previous FBI investigations, etc....somehow none of that came up during the 10 minutes it takes to purchase a gun. Why is that? Could he have used a knife, or a bomb, or simply driven his car through the front door? Sure. But the point is that while this specific event may have been un-preventable, there is still almost a mass-murder per day in this country that could be prevented if we stopped allowing every single person to exercise their 2nd amendment right and admit that some people are simply unfit for gun ownership.

I'm totally fine with guns. But no rational person desperately needs a gun on such short notice that they can't wait a month while being legitimately vetted. We should not be able to walk in to a gun shop in Philly and walk out with a AR-15 seven minutes later. That is asinine. Not because of the gun itself, but because seven minutes is not sufficient enough time to fully know if the purchaser is reliable and trustworthy with said gun.

 

[NDRock]

You aren't really rich unless you can afford your own army — Marcus Licinius Crassus

It seems like the gun control argument always centers around semi-automatic "assault weapons". I'm curious as to where people think the line should (if it should at all) be drawn. Is there any push by gun groups like the NRA to allow fully automatic weapons to be easily purchased? What about other types of weapons?

At the end of the day, is everyone for some type of "gun control" or do some people think everything should be legal (and I mean everything)? Personally, I'm not big into guns like many of my friends (I own a shotgun) but believe everyone should have the right to protect themselves.

I don't think it's a great idea if billionaires are able have their own private armies like in ancient Rome, although maybe the rivalry between a Bill Gates and Steve Jobbs would have been more interesting.

 

[NorthDakota]

You aren't really rich unless you can afford your own army — Marcus Licinius Crassus



I don't think it's a great idea if billionaires are able have their own private armies like in ancient Rome, although maybe the rivalry between a Bill Gates and Steve Jobbs would have been more interesting.

Have you seen the average Mac user? They are weak little *****es. PC Master Race wins easy.

 

[IrishLion]

Have you seen the average Mac user? They are weak little *****es. PC Master Race wins easy.

 

[phork]

It already is illegal to modify the firing mechanism to make it full auto. The only way to have a full auto is to purchase a pre-ban gun or a pre-ban auto sear to drop into a new gun.

the bump fire crap is both unreliable, difficult to control and most importantly, not full auto.

See here: ARFULLAUTO - / for $125. Whether its illegal or not any joe blow can buy a kit and do it.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Nhv4hMGdQ_g" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Both of these are google images of Ruger .22 rifles. I think you are intimidated by the appearances of "military-style" rifles vs. hunting ones.

I don't care if people don't like Americans. I'm curious why they move here if that's the case.

No intimidation at all. A gun is a gun. However what is the fire rate? Can I modify it to be full auto? You are mistaking me for being Pro gun ban, I am not.

Just as an aside I read somewhere that there was 998 mass shootings since Sandy Hook, you know the the place where a whole lot of little kids got mowed down? Only 2 of those were Muslim shooters. Now I can't verify that stat but here is an article worth reading:

Pulse Nightclub Massacre Marks Nearly 1,000 Mass Shootings since Sandy Hook

These shooters have murdered at least 1,105 people and wounded 3,929 in just two and a half years.

You don't see a problem with that?

 

[phork]

Here is another article:

Islamophobes, Homophobes, And Shooters: Why There's No Difference

And another:

Another Mass Shooting, And The U.S. Again Ponders Its Gun Laws

 

[BobbyMac]

See here: ARFULLAUTO*-*/ for $125. Whether its illegal or not any joe blow can buy a kit and do it.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Nhv4hMGdQ_g" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>



No intimidation at all. A gun is a gun. However what is the fire rate? Can I modify it to be full auto? You are mistaking me for being Pro gun ban, I am not.

Just as an aside I read somewhere that there was 998 mass shootings since Sandy Hook, you know the the place where a whole lot of little kids got mowed down? Only 2 of those were Muslim shooters. Now I can't verify that stat but here is an article worth reading:

Pulse Nightclub Massacre Marks Nearly 1,000 Mass Shootings since Sandy Hook

These shooters have murdered at least 1,105 people and wounded 3,929 in just two and a half years.

You don't see a problem with that?

You need to look up the word conflate. You are an ill informed child spreading unsolicited, self manufactured propaganda. Run along to your designated safe place.

 

[Booslum31]

Looks like the shooter's wife might be charged as well.

 

[NorthDakota]

You need to look up the word conflate. You are an ill informed child spreading unsolicited, self manufactured propaganda. Run along to your designated safe place.

It's also been 3.5 years since Sandy Hook....

 

[goldandblue]

When the kid waving the Confederate flag shot up the black church last year, we were all supposed to burn the Confederate flag, take down statues of Confederate generals, and dig up the graves of Confederate veterans. Now, though, we aren't supposed to even mention "Islam," the obvious cause of all of this, because it is inconvenient for the Democratic coalition. Absurd.

And about Islam: can you please specify which actions ISIS takes that Muhammad either (a) did not engage in himself or (b) would have clearly disapproved of? I cannot. Therefore I cannot say that ISIS's interpretation of its religious duties are incorrect interpretations of Islam.

#Truth

 

[ND NYC]

timframe, response question:

how soon after police got call of the shooting did they actually enter the nightclub?

from what iive read, it seems to me like 3 hours went by...is this true?

 

[Bubbles]

See here: ARFULLAUTO*-*/ for $125. Whether its illegal or not any joe blow can buy a kit and do it.

Did you read the page? It is legal for them to sell you a kit that you MUST MODIFY ILLEGALLY OF YOUR OWN VOLITION SO THAT YOU BECOME THE MANUFACTURER of the full auto weapon....thereby making it illegal. I'm not sure where the disconnect here is. You keep pushing the goal post of your 'feelings-based' opinion on this matter when presented with facts. I have no interest in debating an opinion like that since you did not arrive at it using logic and reason, and are by definition, unwilling to change it.

In summary: Already illegal so the correct course of action is enforcement.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Whiskey the point of my posts, with videos, is to show that they can be made automatic or close to it very easily. My solution is to make it illegal to do so. There is NO reason why you need a fully automatic weapon. There is nothing wrong with hunting rifles at all. In fact if you were to go on a rampage with a hunting rifle you would kill people, but not a whole lot of people.

I understand your concern here, and agree that no civilian needs a fully automatic weapon (which have been illegal for decades already). But I can't find evidence that even a single fully automatic weapon has been used in any of the recent spate of mass shootings. Take James Eagan Holmes, the killer who shot up a midnight showing of The Dark Knight Rises in Aurora, Colorado in 2012. He planned the attack meticulously, booby-trapping his apartment with explosives before setting out with body armor, tear gas grenades, and several semi-automatic weapons. If even Eagan didn't bother to illegally modify his M&P15 for fully automatic fire, is the possibility such a threat that we need to ban several popular gun platforms that are functionally no different from hunting rifles?

As Sarge mentioned above, fully automatic ARs can be fun, but they're ridiculously impractical-- inaccurate, unreliable, and they'll empty a magazine of expensive ammunition in seconds.

If "conflating the two forms of violence is dangerous and counter-productive", then it's counter-productive and dangerous for Ryan - and any others - to push for mental health reform after such a terrorist act, even if the bill has been stalled in Congress for years since Columbine and Newtown, etc. The conclusion must be that not only is mental health reform needed and only possibly related to Orlando, but that Ryan - and others - have no other solution to individual acts of terror committed by radicalized elements within America that see our military actions as jihad against their religion.

I was not defending Ryan. The GOP is wholly owned by the NRA. Their narrow focus on "mental health issues" after every mass shooting is no more rational than the Left's obsession with certain weapon platforms.

As always, I appreciate your contributions and your links, Whiskey - any solutions you propose to the status quo that address the causes of terrorists' acts.

Biometrics for weapon activation, increased waiting periods, elimination of internet sales, enhanced screening and follow-ups, metal detectors in all potential soft targets, gun control issues shifting to local and state authorities, etc., etc. What is productive and not dangerous??

The most effective defenses against mass shooting are cultural, but as I've lamented many times before, that sort of change is very difficult to bring about. Regarding technocratic policy changes that might make a difference, I'm not optimistic. There are more guns than people in this country. Short of something extreme like a mass confiscation program (akin to Australia's), I'm not sure meaningful progress can be made. And even then, that would likely only limit the damage done by insane loners like Roof, Dear and Eagan. Few states have stricter gun laws than France, but they've still got a growing problem with domestic Islamist terror attacks.

 

[Irish#1]

The enemy isn't radical Christianity, radical Buddhism, or Hinduism, or Judaism. All the SOB's doing this shit are praising Allah and waging jihad in the hope of entering paradise.

Are they going to be disappointed when their day comes. The walk up to the Pearly Gates with a big smile on their face only to be told to turn around and walk toward the gates surrounded by fire. As they walk away, they hear a voice say, "Did you ever hear of the commandment that says Thou Shall Not Kill?"

 

[ACamp1900]

Are they going to be disappointed when their day comes. The walk up to the Pearly Gates with a big smile on their face only to be told to turn around and walk toward the gates surrounded by fire. As they walk away, they hear a voice say, "Did you ever hear of the commandment that says Thou Shall Not Kill?"

"I'm sorry, you misunderstood, YOU are one of the virgins...."

 

[Whiskeyjack]

"I'm sorry, you misunderstood, YOU are one of the virgins...."

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/lhmwcmOPemk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Irish#1]

Whiskey the point of my posts, with videos, is to show that they can be made automatic or close to it very easily. My solution is to make it illegal to do so. There is NO reason why you need a fully automatic weapon. There is nothing wrong with hunting rifles at all. In fact if you were to go on a rampage with a hunting rifle you would kill people, but not a whole lot of people.



And do you want to know why people dislike Americans around the world? The fact is decisions you make affect my country to. We are tied to your hip. And frankly once you have exhausted all your cold dead hands bullshit the best you got is "your opinion is meaningless, you're not an American".



Because in other parts of the world thats the most easily acquired weapon. And I seriously doubt AK47s would flood the streets. They aren't made over here. And again, no one is saying make the guns illegal but make the controls stricter. This is part of the problem as well. Gun control doesn't mean ban guns but yet time after time you go 0-60 and jump to that conclusion.



I woud rather someone use a knife than a fully automatic rifle, if you can't see the logic there then I can't help you.
Again no one said to ban anything. We are trying to have a discussion about the problem and solutions to it. But some people clearly can't debate or carry on rational conversation without slinging mud and telling people that their opinion doesn't matter.
As for fertilizer I believe that after OklahomaCity any large purchases came under scrutiny.

You are right, are these guys going to try stuff? Yup. But again, why make it EASY for them to do?

Someone bent on killing a large number of people isn't even going to think about a knife.

Forgot to quote you to. They are semi-automatic until people modify them to be fully automatic. So thats a start. Make it illegal to modify these guns in any way.

Do you think some nut job that is intent on killing a large number of people is worried about a law? They are going to modify the weapon regardless. The only people a law like this would affect would be the law abiding citizen that never even thought of modifying their weapon in the first place.