ongoing mass shootings thread

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
lunatic assassins...

23407.jpg


i met him once as a wide eyed hero worshipping teenager, total asshole
 
Last edited:
I think we are all adults here and can understand that just because he pledged allegiance to ISIS doesn't mean it was his motivation for the shooting. It doesn't mean they orchestrated it. It doesn't even mean they were aware he existed.

It's entirely plausible, and I think likely, that the pledge was said to deflect from whatever his reasons for shooting up the club actually were. Or it was done to boost his "street cred", if you will.

But clearly he was an unstable person and able to purchase high-powered weaponry with relative ease, something which reasonable people outside the U.S. simply cannot fathom.
 
I wish they didn't cave into the demands of Paul Ryan. It's not a 'partisan' view to think you shouldn't be glorifying killers with your media. Not giving credit to someone for murders they want credit for (even though we all know the truth -- it's not a secret) is a good idea.
 
I think we are all adults here and can understand that just because he pledged allegiance to ISIS doesn't mean it was his motivation for the shooting. It doesn't mean they orchestrated it. It doesn't even mean they were aware he existed.

It's entirely plausible, and I think likely, that the pledge was said to deflect from whatever his reasons for shooting up the club actually were. Or it was done to boost his "street cred", if you will.

But clearly he was an unstable person and able to purchase high-powered weaponry with relative ease, something which reasonable people outside the U.S. simply cannot fathom.
And even if he was self radicalized, which is possible, it still doesn't negate the other points.
 
It seems like hyperbole, but nothing will ever get done. Rights/laws/semantics are more important than safety


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
We need those AR-15s in case the government ever tries to oppress us, as an AR-15 is secretly very good against tanks and stealth bombers.

When that pussy dictator (paradox noted) Obama comes with his nukes, at least they'll be armed.

On a sort of related note, I was speaking to somebody who was visiting from Europe and she asked, without joking, how come there was nobody at Disney World to shoot at that alligator who snatched the toddler. She is a senior citizen, wasn't poking fun in any way, but was actually genuinely surprised that people weren't packing on that beach.
 
and the terrorists win yet again :sad:


Yeah, I think the Far Right definitely won when England revealed their assassin's cry of "Britain first," too. Yes, this is how this works.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Yeah, I think the Far Right definitely won when England revealed their assassin's cry of "Britain first," too. Yes, this is how this works.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


:huh: I'm talking about the NRA. They're a highly organized terrorist group that does everything in their power to get as many guns on the streets as possible. If they flood the streets and loosen the laws they know the guns will get in the hands of the mentally ill, the desperate, and the angry and we'll have more mass shootings. Then they can strike fear in you so that you keep arming yourself. Sales rise. And then they convince you that responsible and logical laws that most thinking people want are moves to "take your guns". They're using the American people as pawns.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
:huh: I'm talking about the NRA. They're a highly organized terrorist group that does everything in their power to get as many guns on the streets as possible. If they flood the streets and loosen the laws they know the guns will get in the hands of the mentally ill, the desperate, and the angry and we'll have more mass shootings. Then they can strike fear in you so that you keep arming yourself. Sales rise. And then they convince you that responsible and logical laws that most thinking people want are moves to "take your guns". They're using the American people as pawns.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


Fair enough. Posted my message before you edited yours to include "American" and changed the original quote you were responding to.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Fair enough. Posted my message before you edited yours to include "American" and changed the original quote you were responding to.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


I didn't edit anything, those were two separate posts.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
I didn't edit anything, those were two separate posts.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


Oops, you're right on that.

In that case, should the federal government redact documents when they decide doing otherwise would scare the stupid, easily swayed proletariat?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Even from the perspective of a hardened gun nut, I don't understand the logic that it ought to be easier for a person on a terrorist watch list to buy an assault rifle than to hop on a plane to visit their sick mother or whatever.
 
Even from the perspective of a hardened gun nut, I don't understand the logic that it ought to be easier for a person on a terrorist watch list to buy an assault rifle than to hop on a plane to visit their sick mother or whatever.


I definitely understand where you're coming from. Nine times out of ten, these days, I find myself on the side of gun control activists.

However, this time I'm a little unsure. There are nearly no rules for how one ends up on the no fly list. Anecdotally, I have an associate who has been involved in Muslim civil rights movements. He's told many stories of how easy it is to find yourself on the no fly list, if you're involved in organizations the government simply doesn't like.



Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Wouldn't that suggest the processes and criteria of adding people to no-fly and similar lists is flawed and should be revised, not that people under genuine suspicion of terroristic sympathies should be permitted to purchase high-powered weaponry?

Moreover, correct me if I'm wrong, but in the States I would arouse some form of suspicion if I rather obviously went about buying the ingredients for a bomb, but nobody will bat an eyelid if I buy a gun capable of murdering fifty people in a single event.
 
Oops, you're right on that.

In that case, should the federal government redact documents when they decide doing otherwise would scare the stupid, easily swayed proletariat?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


When did anyone infer that?

But in this instance redaction made since. But because they caved into Ryan they basically gave ISIS another notch in their headboard they don't deserve. Between this and Trump they're just handing them recruitment tools.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Wouldn't that suggest the processes and criteria of adding people to no-fly and similar lists is flawed and should be revised, not that people under genuine suspicion of terroristic sympathies should be permitted to purchase high-powered weaponry?

Moreover, correct me if I'm wrong, but in the States I would arouse some form of suspicion if I rather obviously went about buying the ingredients for a bomb, but nobody will bat an eyelid if I buy a gun capable of murdering fifty people in a single event.


I don't disagree with you. Ideally, we need some codified system for placing people on these lists, and we need to do all we can to at least make carrying out whatever nefarious plans they have as difficult as possible.

But, at the same time, I strongly sympathize with anyone who is slow to simply give the government the power to use these lists to restrict rights while hoping that, at some later date, the system is fixed. The system has to be fixed first.

Really, this would be the same as the Patriot Act. Is it reasonable to listen in on private citizens' conversations if we have reasonable suspicion that they plan to commit a terrorist act? Of course. But, when given the power to apply "reasonable suspicion" liberally, the government didn't exactly show their ability to behave responsibly.

I understand the desire to not get burned again.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
On an unrelated note, I'd just like to know how many of the politicians who've voted against gun control measures also claim to be so pro-life, to the point where they support uber-restrictive abortion laws or the shutting down of Planned Parenthood. If there's any overlap, I'd like to see that particular hypocrisy called out a hell of a lot more often.
 
they basically gave ISIS another notch in their headboard they don't deserve.

Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference


so by "the terrorists win," you were indeed referring to ISIS, not the NRA, as I originally implied.

Why make life difficult by denying this in the first place?

Additionally, if that is your logic, why would you not support the idea of being "hush hush" about the British assassin's cry of "Britain first"? Applying your logic, revealing this would give the Fascist Right an underserved notch in their headboard.

Yet, if the right wing David Cameron would've done this, what do you suspect the international reaction would've been?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
so by "the terrorists win," you were indeed referring to ISIS, not the NRA, as I originally implied.

Why make life difficult by denying this in the first place?


The first one was referring to ISIS, hence the context of the article posted. The second was the NRA. The context of your post referenced the far right so I assumed you were talking about my American terrorist post. Simple as that.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom