Orlando Attack...ISIS claims it!

[wadle5]

What are you some concessions you would be willing to make that you feel ARE reasonable?

I would ask you the same? As you seem to continue to pick and chose what you want to "prove" and you ignore the rest of the rebuttal and supporting details.

 

[-JD-]

I never know what you are talking about. This has occurred in multiple threads now, not just with me but between you and others where you claim that you wont answer because they dodged your questions, but then fail to explain what you are talking about or where the original question was.

You are arguing against a point I am not making. I'm not advocating for taking ALL guns away. No one is.

What are some common sense concessions? how about not selling guns to people the FBI knows are ISIS sympathizers, for one. Now you go...

 

[wadle5]

I never know what you are talking about. This has occurred in multiple threads now, not just with me but between you and others where you claim that you wont answer because they dodged your questions, but then fail to explain what you are talking about or where the original question was.

You are arguing against a point I am not making. I'm not advocating for taking ALL guns away. No one is.

What are some common sense concessions? how about not selling guns to people the FBI knows are ISIS sympathizers, for one. Now you go...

It does occur often you are right. (Look we agreed!)
Seems to be a common occurrence of when I respond with multiple points that build on one another and members pick and choose what they want to respond to. This makes it not a fluid debate or discussion and takes them out of context.

The original point is no matter what laws you pass the criminal or let's use a different description NON-law ABIDInG citizen will still obtain weapons and you have now disarmed a large populous of law abiding citizens. How has that worked out in Chicago?
Lastly your point of FBI watch list = not obtaining a weapon is exactly why I blamed the FBI. They and he NSA have all this information on individuals with a history and can't cross their Ts and dot their I's when a former individual under investigation purchases a weapon? How is this not a red flag? But again how can we trust them when they are same ones reviewing a current Presidential Candidate?
No they are more concerned about the neighbors kid illegally pirating music.

 

[-JD-]

@-JD-

He is referring to the fact that a no fly list style ban on guns would not stand up to US Constitutional scrutiny. There are several obvious reasons for this and yes a simple Google search will find lots of articles.

What are some concessions of our freedoms that we Americans should make so we don't have to worry about being killed by ISIS sypathizers among us? Personally I am not willing to give up my freedoms over this.

In Canada you all can do as you please. I like Canada's banking system but not it's open door policy.

You see any sort of changes to gun policy as a loss of your freedom? Aren't there already some restrictions on civilian weaponry in the US?

The original point is no matter what laws you pass the criminal or let's use a different description NON-law ABIDInG citizen will still obtain weapons and you have now disarmed a large populous of law abiding citizens. How has that worked out in Chicago?

You are making an incorrect assumption here. I'm not advocating for disarming law abiding citizens. Never was.

In fact, I'm not even pushing any specific policy. Merely the idea that there are things that can be done to limit criminal access to weapons without disarming law abiding citizens.

Lastly your point of FBI watch list = not obtaining a weapon is exactly why I blamed the FBI. They and he NSA have all this information on individuals with a history and can't cross their Ts and dot their I's when a former individual under investigation purchases a weapon? How is this not a red flag? .

My understanding is that it's not a red flag because the current system limits their access to that information. Though they undoubtedly share some blame in this if they did in fact know about this guy beforehand.


Now you go.. you never addressed my reply to your statement that Muslims aren't supporting the US against ISIS. Do you concede that you were wrong? How about gun policy? are there anything's you think should be changed, or is the current policy as good as it can be?

 

[-JD-]

Well how familiar are you with US law, the US Constitution and US history?

Yes I see a secret government no guns list as an encroachment on freedom. To answer your question, no, not "any changes", I just have a problem with unconstitutional changes.

If you are familiar with the three things I listed above then it should be obvious why a secret government "no guns" list , operating under the executive branch, carried out with no judicial review or appeal would be unconstitutional.

You know the first amendment correct? I'm sure you understand it as well. It is quite well known.

Now imagine the government could decide without judicial process or trial that citizens had lost their right to free speech because they are a threat. No crime charged. No guilt found. No judges. No jury. The government just put a name on a list and poof there goes your right to free speech.

This would be highly unconstitutional. Thankfully the founding fathers were smart enough to write a strong set of checks and balances in the Constitution. The Bill of rights (which includes the second amendment) was written to protect exactly against the example above.

Yep. I dont disagree with any of that, but obviously you must realize that this means the government does nothing while someone it knows is an ISIS sympathizer purchases an assault rifle.

Do you simply accept that risk as a reality of a free society? Do you think there are other ways to go about limiting known criminals access to weapons?

 

[CXS]

[Come on dude ... you are seriously missing the mark here.

1. Adam Lanza didn't shout Ala Akbar as he did his killing. He didn't call 911 and give a speech about the Dali Lama either. If you can't see the difference then wow. Just wow.

You are correct about Lanza. Did you happen to read this? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism

2. The Miami shooter killed those people based on HIS OWN RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. He shouted out his BELIEFS as he murdered his victims.

The article referenced above shows he may not have understood the factions himself but knew making a statement against the US.

Now "they" are saying he hung out at the nightclub and maybe was a closeted gay himself and killed because of self-loathing. True? Nobody knows and we sure due act like we do.

My point is there's too little known about this guy to generalize as most of us, myself included, Do to make a point.

 

[-JD-]

Conservatives:"Don't say it has anything to do with guns!"
Liberals:"Don't say it has anything to do with Islam!"

 

[-JD-]

Yes we accept the risk. That is why America is greatest.

Btw ISIS sympathizers are neither known nor criminals and I'm sure they are in Canada as well. They are in definitely France yet the tough gun laws did nothing to prevent a massacre there.

I use the term 'known' as I've read it in multiple news stories in the last couple days. I also posted a video earlier in which the president uses the term.

 

[Thai]

Obama: ‘We Need to Do Some Soul Searching’ After Orlando Massacre.

Oh yes, we are at fault here. :frusty:

Apparently, guns are reponsible here. Not ISIS. Not radical Islam. We, the American people, are responsible for this because we let guns kill people.

I guess that I was WRONG. Obama and libtards do not blame Israel...they blame us for the deadliest mass shooting in history!!!!

 

[ben550]

Conservatives:"Don't say it has anything to do with guns!"
Liberals:"Don't say it has anything to do with Islam!"

I understand why "conservatives" say that about guns, but It is beyond me why liberals continue to be apologists for Islam... even though the overwhelming majority of those defending the religion do not practice it and have no idea what it is or stands for.

Well I realize the FBI says it is tracking up to 100 active terrorist sypathizers.

However we shouldn't give up our rights because of their religious hatred and violence.

We should not. This terrorist act should not be threatening any of our constitutional rights... but it is.

He says he is a Muslim. He said he was killing because of his desire to execute a rare ideology of Islamic hatred. End of story.

Liberals don't get too decide who is a Muslim anymore than conservatives do.

Exactly right. We have already witnessed the re-writing of history only now it is occurring hours and days after the history was made...

 

[ben550]

I am all for common sense regulations...

I would support certain gun control measures. For example:

1) Muslims will no longer be allowed to purchase firearms in the United States
2) All Muslims must turn in any firearms owned for a $100 credit per unit
3) Any Muslim found not abiding by the new laws concerning firearms will be automatically deported with all assets seized and donated to local charities.
4) Any gun shop/dealer that sells a Muslim a firearm will lose their FFL

hahaha

It is the religion of peace... why do they need firearms?

 

[ndcent]

Oh good, Thai had another chance to type "libtard" in a post.

 

[ndcent]

Fueled by extremist religious ideology and self loathing for being homosexual is what drove this person to commit this horrific act. Even in death he chose to claim some ISIS allegiance to cover up his closet homosexuality.

This is the narrative making sense to me given all we know at this time.

It's also deeply disturbing to me in our secular country so many will find that religious ideology is only a factor if the subject is brown.

 

[wadle5]

Fueled by extremist religious ideology and self loathing for being homosexual is what drove this person to commit this horrific act. Even in death he chose to claim some ISIS allegiance to cover up his closet homosexuality.



This is the narrative making sense to me given all we know at this time.



It's also deeply disturbing to me in our secular country so many will find that religious ideology is only a factor if the subject is brown.

Yes because he was gay he killed these people? Seems harsh...or because his religion that he pledged allegiance to teaches exactly that.
Another distracted excuse to somehow justify his actions and ignore the continuous reoccurring actions of what their religion teaches.

 

[ndcent]

Yes because he was gay he killed these people? Seems harsh...or because his religion that he pledged allegiance to teaches exactly that.
Another distracted excuse to somehow justify his actions and ignore the continuous reoccurring actions of what their religion teaches.

You missed the "and" in my post?

I think it's a combination, current evidence supports that. Self loathing leads to horrific deeds, ice that cake with extremist religious ideology and you can have disaster.

It's really offensive you think people that disagree with you are justifying senseless death.

 

[ThorInc]

Fueled by extremist religious ideology and self loathing for being homosexual is what drove this person to commit this horrific act. Even in death he chose to claim some ISIS allegiance to cover up his closet homosexuality.

This is the narrative making sense to me given all we know at this time.

It's also deeply disturbing to me in our secular country so many will find that religious ideology is only a factor if the subject is brown.

I disagree. It may have played a role but more likely the literal teachings of the Islamic religion and his upbringing contributed in a much greater way. He was after all investigated twice by the FBI.

Personally, I think the elephant in the room is the 24 hour new and social media coverage of these tragedies as it encourages self-fulfilling prophesies by giving these individuals a platform for martyrdom. I can't fathom a different reason why this person would feel the need to act out hatred against the West as he was born and grew up in the West and likely never experienced the life of an average middle easterner in a war torn Islamic country.

What does ISIS want? They want a holy war against the West. Since they are in no way truly able to fight a military war against "the Infidel", they are doing the next best thing keeping themselves in the 24 hour news cycle, driving fear and Islamophobia in the West and hoping that "we" will persecute Muslims living in the West and this will drive the Western Muslims to do their bidding for them. It's a tight rope walk especially when the wind blows.

 

[ben550]

[MENTION=56396]Hepar[/MENTION]

Looks like this is relevant to our discussion. It appears that there was an off duty police officer and two other people carrying guns (3 total) of 300 patrons... who opened fire at the gunman and forced him into the bathroom where he took hostages and the standoff ensued...

This is huge Pro-Gun news. No wonder it is not being reported widely...

"An off-duty police officer and two others had opened fire, forcing gunman Omar Mateen to retreat to a bathroom where he took hostages."

Photo released shows injury to officer who was shot in head, but protected by helmet | WFTV

I would argue that if those three had not been in there... It would have been much worse.

 

[wadle5]

https://www.facebook.com/gunpornhub/videos/280484785622431/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wadle5]

You missed the "and" in my post?

I think it's a combination, current evidence supports that. Self loathing leads to horrific deeds, ice that cake with extremist religious ideology and you can have disaster.

It's really offensive you think people that disagree with you are justifying senseless death.

It's really offensive you think just because you disagree you must be justifying a senseless death, because I never said anything to that extent.

Remember you are supposed to be neutral so stop trying to paint a different picture and how you are the victim. Truly sad how you can spin this about you?

 

[ndcent]

I disagree. It may have played a role but more likely the literal teachings of the Islamic religion and his upbringing contributed in a much greater way. He was after all investigated twice by the FBI.

Personally, I think the elephant in the room is the 24 hour new and social media coverage of these tragedies as it encourages self-fulfilling prophesies by giving these individuals a platform for martyrdom. I can't fathom a different reason why this person would feel the need to act out hatred against the West as he was born and grew up in the West and likely never experienced the life of an average middle easterner in a war torn Islamic country.

What does ISIS want? They want a holy war against the West. Since they are in no way truly able to fight a military war against "the Infidel", they are doing the next best thing keeping themselves in the 24 hour news cycle, driving fear and Islamophobia in the West and hoping that "we" will persecute Muslims living in the West and this will drive the Western Muslims to do their bidding for them. It's a tight rope walk especially when the wind blows.

I'm confused. You agree his homosexuality could be a factor or disagree. You said "I disagree" then agreed with me.