Terror Attack in Florida

[HighlandHeart]

How many people on here with a military or law enforcement background of some sort feel like Americans would be safer with widespread concealed carry
in bars

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

I'm gonna go with 49 or less.

You are correct. This is not the movies. What do you think the mad shooter will do when 10 people start shooting at him. He will stop, take cover, or die.

When the cops show up10 minutes after the shooter begins his rampage, does he simply say oh no the cops!!!! and lay down his gun? Better he's discouraged ten minutes earlier.

How many states have open or CCW carry laws?

Do you hear of shootouts by drunks on a regular basis? Me neither.

Fifty people were killed in this incident, and more may still die from their wounds, so if armed civilians opened fire on the gunman after he had killed three people, and five more people were killed by gunfire before the gunman was killed or ran away, there would be forty two more people still alive, and a lot less wounded. As well in case people haven't noticed, these gunmen are choosing gun free zones to carry out these shootings, so that they don't have to worry about armed civilians shooting them, so would all of these people even go on shooting sprees if the gun free zones didn't exist? Kennesaw Georgia is a classic example of how armed civilians deter crime.

[fitzy]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

I'm gonna go with 49 or less.

You are correct. This is not the movies. What do you think the mad shooter will do when 10 people start shooting at him. He will stop, take cover, or die.

When the cops show up10 minutes after the shooter begins his rampage, does he simply say oh no the cops!!!! and lay down his gun? Better he's discouraged ten minutes earlier.

How many states have open or CCW carry laws?

Do you hear of shootouts by drunks on a regular basis? Me neither.

I get what you're saying I was only speculating. If you were one of the 10 and a half drunk panicking guy sees your gun points his gun at you and opens fire while the shooter is still shooting what happens?

I was only trying to point out that maybe it's not so cut and dried as pulling out a pistol and shooting him.

[fitzy]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Fifty people were killed in this incident, and more may still die from their wounds, so if armed civilians opened fire on the gunman after he had killed three people, and five more people were killed by gunfire before the gunman was killed or ran away, there would be forty two more people still alive, and a lot less wounded. As well in case people haven't noticed, these gunmen are choosing gun free zones to carry out these shootings, so that they don't have to worry about armed civilians shooting them, so would all of these people even go on shooting sprees if the gun free zones didn't exist? Kennesaw Georgia is a classic example of how armed civilians deter crime.

You are probably right. Maybe he just throws in a couple grenades then? Who knows.

It's all speculation.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by fitzy

You are probably right. Maybe he just throws in a couple grenades then? Who knows.

It's all speculation.

What happened in Kennesaw Georgia is not speculation. It is proof that criminals would rather avoid armed citizens.

[CaberTosser]

I think that the thing more dangerous than the firearms is the internet, it is after all where most weirdos brew up and nurture their hatreds and sick plans. It is also where they get their attention & infamy after committing their atrocities. Taking this into consideration I'm thinking the internet is more responsible for the increased body counts from psychopaths killing sprees than any firearms magazine capacity. It used to be that societies weirdo's and mentally ill would be institutionalized, or in distant 3rd world nations they might even simply be killed. At any rate they were largely isolated in previous days, but now they have worldwide support groups offering encouragement...... These days psychopaths can find many like-minded homophobes, misogynists, religious zealots, pedophiles, bigots, etc and they reinforce one another into believing that their sickness is normal.

[fitzy]

Originally Posted by CaberTosser

I think that the thing more dangerous than the firearms is the internet, it is after all where most weirdos brew up and nurture their hatreds and sick plans. It is also where they get their attention & infamy after committing their atrocities. Taking this into consideration I'm thinking the internet is more responsible for the increased body counts from psychopaths killing sprees than any firearms magazine capacity. It used to be that societies weirdo's and mentally ill would be institutionalized, or in distant 3rd world nations they might even simply be killed. At any rate they were largely isolated in previous days, but now they have worldwide support groups offering encouragement...... These days psychopaths can find many like-minded homophobes, misogynists, religious zealots, pedophiles, bigots, etc and they reinforce one another into believing that their sickness is normal.

I'd agree with you 100%

[300magman]

Originally Posted by deerguy

Always has to be one in the bunch.

People, this attitude right here is why these problems will keep happening. Until you are ready to offend someone nothing will change.

Boom!! Someone who gets it!!

It's a serious problem when we are so tolerant that we are afraid to offend those who are intolerant of us and wish to do us harm.

[propliner]

Originally Posted by 300magman

Boom!! Someone who gets it!!

It's a serious problem when we are so tolerant that we are afraid to offend those who are intolerant of us and wish to do us harm.

Yep, a society that's tolerating itself to death. The narcissists win every time if you tolerate their BS. It's their game.

[260 Rem]

The reality is that regardless of "carry" laws, it is unlikely that a single person would engage unless they are well trained. I don't recall a single "mass" shooter that was armed with an AR ever being taken out by an armed "citizen"? Arguably the most effective training regime would be to train a high number of people to run towards the shooter and wrestle him/her down. Chances are pretty good that in close quarters like a nightclub, 4/10 would have reached the shooter. By nature, humans are a herd animal wired to flee...perhaps time to ingraine "pack" reaction.

[jkav]

Originally Posted by TreeGuy

Dozens of innocents were slaughtered. Again.... Can we at least not give them 24 hours of respect before wading into the inevitable ideological debate?

Prayers for the fallen.

x2. Thanks.

[elkhunter11]

Arguably the most effective training regime would be to train a high number of people to run towards the shooter and wrestle him/her down. Chances are pretty good that in close quarters like a nightclub, 4/10 would have reached the shooter.

But 9/10 people don't want to risk being one of the 6/10 that don't make it to the shooter. The reality is, that no matter how they talk about what they would have done in that situation,most people would hide or run away.

[elk396]

This whole thing should give Trump a surge in the polls.

[waterninja]

It seems to me that that a lot of these shootings occur in crowded venues. One suggestion that I'm surprised no-one has put forward is to ramp up security at at venues that have more than x amount of people. I know that when I am at a Eskimo or Oiler game there are police in the crowd that are armed and have training in dealing with a serious incident. A lot of airlines have armed Air Marshalls posing as passengers. Also metal detectors at the entrances to large gatherings would also probably help.
Sure it's just a small thing, and will not cover all the venues where bad things could happen, but I see something like that being utilized in the future.

[rugatika]

https://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesth...zOM#.hdjKpwQWM

Potential mass shootings stopped by armed citizens.

[histyle]

I find it stunning that so many people (with the help of the mainstream media) are turning this into a gun control issue. It's not.
The FBI had the perp under investigation on two separate occasions. With no findings. Why? Because the Obama administration has placed time limits on these investigations. The US also used to keep surveillance on the mosques that were preaching 'radical' ideas. This is also no longer the case under this administration. What about properly vetting immigrants & 'refugees' coming in from countries where the type of thinking that it's Allah's will to kill infidels (especially homosexuals) is the norm? Nope, can't do that either, it might hurt their feelings. So what have we done in North America instead of locking the gate? We've thrown it wide open. Is no one looking at places like England, France, and Sweden to see what mass migration does to the very fabric of western civilization? Nope.
This is a war of attrition between two very different cultures that has been going on for centuries now. The other side has made a declaration of war several times. Too bad our leaders won't make the same declaration (yes, we've dropped some bombs, but there is no official declaration of war which is a very different thing altogether). It would at least give law enforcement on home soil the power to go after these guys forcefully (remember what FDR was doing on home soil during WWII?).
Allowing this subject to be misconstrued into a gun control issue insures we lose. It's far deeper, and bigger than that. And don't think for a second that we here in Canada are going to be immune to this.
Hurt feelings be damned, these people want us dead.

[silverdoctor]

No, this isn't a gun control issue - but it's being made into one. Is it terrorism, flipping hate the word. It's a made up propagandic term to scare people.

Slice it and dice it any way you like folks - it's a hate crime. Be it Islamic hatred of Christianity or LGBT or whatever- or vice versa. Christians have no love for Islam or LGBT either - very apparent on here. And Christians have their share of fruitloops and nutbars - just like any other religion does. KKK is still alive and well - what did they want again?

LGBT have been a punching bag for the Christian side for decades - and it's not getting any better. There are so called christians celebrating these deaths, how sad is that. Baptist pastor in Arizona calling for killing all the gays. Seriously believe this was a terror attack? The shooter hated gays.


Gimme a break.

[elkhunter11]

Yes our leaders are trying to turn this into a gun control issue, to avoid admitting that it was a terrorist act committed by a muslim. I can only wonder how they would be trying to twist this if the muslim terrorist had used a bomb instead of firearms?

[histyle]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

No, this isn't a gun control issue - but it's being made into one. Is it terrorism, flipping hate the word. It's a made up propagandic term to scare people.

Slice it and dice it any way you like folks - it's a hate crime. Be it Islamic hatred of Christianity or LGBT or whatever- or vice versa. Christians have no love for Islam or LGBT either - very apparent on here. And Christians have their share of fruitloops and nutbars - just like any other religion does. KKK is still alive and well - what did they want again?

LGBT have been a punching bag for the Christian side for decades - and it's not getting any better. There are so called christians celebrating these deaths, how sad is that. Baptist pastor in Arizona calling for killing all the gays. Seriously believe this was a terror attack? The shooter hated gays.


Gimme a break.

The perp called 911 before the attack to declare his allegiance to ISIS & it's leader Abu Bhakr Al Bhagdadi knowing full well the call was being recorded. Pretty important not to overlook this fact, no?
Without doubt this was a terror attack.
Now, the so called Christians celebrating these deaths are idiots. That being said, when was the last time a person identifying themselves as Christian stormed a LGBT nightclub with a rifle while crying out "Jesus is great"?
Forest for the trees my friend, forest for the trees...

[silverdoctor]

Originally Posted by histyle

The perp called 911 before the attack to declare his allegiance to ISIS & it's leader Abu Bhakr Al Bhagdadi knowing full well the call was being recorded. Pretty important not to overlook this fact, no?
Without doubt this was a terror attack.
Now, the so called Christians celebrating these deaths are idiots. That being said, when was the last time a person identifying themselves as Christian stormed a LGBT nightclub with a rifle while crying out "Jesus is great"?
Forest for the trees my friend, forest for the trees...

Terrorism is a made up word. this was a hate crime as all are. Terrorist sounds alot better than a crackpot with a cause.

Remember Timothy McVeigh? Knoxville Unitarian Church? kkk? Aryan brotherhood? Shooting of abortion doctors? The list goes on and on and on...

There has been more christian so called "terrorism" on US soil that anything... Oh but wait, domestics aren't classified as terrorists I guess.

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

Terrorism is a made up word. this was a hate crime as all are. Terrorist sounds alot better than a crackpot with a cause.

Remember Timothy McVeigh? Knoxville Unitarian Church? kkk? Aryan brotherhood? Shooting of abortion doctors? The list goes on and on and on...

There has been more christian so called "terrorism" on US soil that anything... Oh but wait, domestics aren't classified as terrorists I guess.

I remember early in the day of 9/11 before anyone really knew who was responsible for the attacks. Many news providers were urging people not to assume that it was an Islamic or Muslim attack as they had been recently attacked by a "homegrown terrorist Timothy McVeigh."

So even in 2000 or (was that 2001?) people considered Timothy McVeigh a terrorist. Truth be told 9/11 was when the "war on terror" began and popularized, but it was not "made up" that day.

EDIT: Just for the record, I know what you are inferring, and I kind of agree with you. What some individuals do and don't consider terrorism is to say the least, unsettling, but I disagree with your idea that it is a recent addition to our vocabulary. I would say the term "hate-crime" is a much more recent addition to our lingo than terrorism.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

Terrorism is a made up word. this was a hate crime as all are. Terrorist sounds alot better than a crackpot with a cause.

Remember Timothy McVeigh? Knoxville Unitarian Church? kkk? Aryan brotherhood? Shooting of abortion doctors? The list goes on and on and on...

There has been more christian so called "terrorism" on US soil that anything... Oh but wait, domestics aren't classified as terrorists I guess.

It's a made up word for sure, to discribe a group whose mandate is to terrorize another .
Munich , Oklahoma, Paris , Dublin, Montreal, they were all terrorist attacks no matter what the motivation.
Post 73 pretty well suns it up.
All one needs is a hate towards others .....
Cat

[silverdoctor]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

I remember early in the day of 9/11 before anyone really knew who was responsible for the attacks. Many news providers were urging people not to assume that it was an Islamic or Muslim attack as they had been recently attacked by a "homegrown terrorist Timothy McVeigh."

So even in 2000 or (was that 2001?) people considered Timothy McVeigh a terrorist. Truth be told 9/11 was when the "war on terror" began and popularized, but it was not "made up" that day.

EDIT: Just for the record, I know what you are inferring, and I kind of agree with you. What some individuals do and don't consider terrorism is to say the least, unsettling, but I disagree with your idea that it is a recent addition to our vocabulary. I would say the term "hate-crime" is a much more recent addition to our lingo than terrorism.

9/11. The day a team of 19 hijackers - 15 of which were from Saudi Arabia, a major US ally and part of the 28 pages removed from the official story of that day - and all controlled by a man hiding out in a remote cave in Afghanistan. The very day that the US decided to write itself a blank check to do what they wanted world wide - spawning a war with Afganistan, Iraq and how many others? How many governments have been toppled by the last 2 administrations?

People expect me to live in fear...? To be terrorized by all this. I don't get that. I could get in the car today and be killed in an accident. Sure I can be blown up or shot in a public place by a fool with a cause, dead is dead, don't know when it's coming - and don't know how I'm going out. A friend died in a car accident last year - he had terminal cancer and really believed the disease would kill him.


There is nothing more dangerous than a fool with a cause...

[histyle]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

Terrorism is a made up word. this was a hate crime as all are. Terrorist sounds alot better than a crackpot with a cause.

Remember Timothy McVeigh? Knoxville Unitarian Church? kkk? Aryan brotherhood? Shooting of abortion doctors? The list goes on and on and on...

There has been more christian so called "terrorism" on US soil that anything... Oh but wait, domestics aren't classified as terrorists I guess.

Ok, I get it. You'd rather debate semantics. Instead of terrorism, how about we call these attacks perpetrated by foreigners (be they legal immigrants or not) acts of war, and the perps carrying out the attacks soldiers? ISIS has declared war on western civilization, and the perp in this case pledged his allegiance to them thereby making him a soldier of ISIS. No?
And all the crackpots with a cause (ie terrorists) that you have listed simply cannot be depicted as examples of mainstream Christianity (much to the chagrin of the MSM). They are viewed as pariahs of Christianity, and rightly so. Whereas ISIS and it's followers/sympathizers now number in the millions. With acts such as this being celebrated. Not to mention they now control vast tracts of land in Iraq, Syria, Libya etc.
I don't know anybody who celebrates the acts of Timothy McVeigh, the KKK et al. Furthermore, anyone that does celebrate these acts (in any way, shape, or form) is a dangerous fool.

[tri777]

SO dam stupid to scapegoat this attack
on dam guns again..

Here is what this issue 'IS': an embarrassing
'F-minuse' failing grade FBI issue' !!

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by silverdoctor

9/11. The day a team of 19 hijackers - 15 of which were from Saudi Arabia, a major US ally and part of the 28 pages removed from the official story of that day - and all controlled by a man hiding out in a remote cave in Afghanistan. The very day that the US decided to write itself a blank check to do what they wanted world wide - spawning a war with Afganistan, Iraq and how many others? How many governments have been toppled by the last 2 administrations?

People expect me to live in fear...? To be terrorized by all this. I don't get that. I could get in the car today and be killed in an accident. Sure I can be blown up or shot in a public place by a fool with a cause, dead is dead, don't know when it's coming - and don't know how I'm going out. A friend died in a car accident last year - he had terminal cancer and really believed the disease would kill him.


There is nothing more dangerous than a fool with a cause...

What happened or didn't happen on 9/11 is a moot point. I was pointing out that the media called Timothy McVeigh a terrorist before you believe the word "terrorism" was created. You believe that the word "terrorism" was created as a result of 9/11; it wasn't.

I don't live in fear, and I don't expect you to either.

Your last sentence is bang on.

[walking buffalo]

Silverdoctor,

You're a smart fellow. Surely you realize that "terrorism" has been defined in the criminal code. Carry on anyways....

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

What happened or didn't happen on 9/11 is a moot point. I was pointing out that the media called Timothy McVeigh a terrorist before you believe the word "terrorism" was created. You believe that the word "terrorism" was created as a result of 9/11; it wasn't.
.

The term terrorist has been around for a long time. Certainly it was used in relation to the PLO in the 70's. If Wikipedia is to be believed, "The word "terrorism" was first recorded in English-language dictionaries in 1798 as meaning "systematic use of terror as a policy."

[elkhunter11]

This seems applicable.

[tri777]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

This seems applicable.

^^ *Like*

Or

"We are advised to NOT judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a
few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners
by the actions of a few lunatics"

Funny how that works..