What confuses me is the idea that it has to be one or the other. Let's say I accept that radicalised Muslims are a danger to society, which I totally do.
How does it follow that disarming them is a bad idea?
I don't understand that at all.
Yeah but it is not even a one or two issue, there are multiple issues that need to be addressed.
The guy was known as a wife basher and had a police record - domestic violence
The guy was known as “strange” or a “little crazy” by many - mental health issues The guy was being watched by the FBI and interviewed on 2 seperate occassions - radicalisation issues
So how did a guy who had violent tendencies, was being investigated by the FBI because people were reporting him and had a police record buy a high powered gun and ammunition?
This is about a failure in police procedures, a failure in FBI procedures, a failure in gun control and a failure to identify and help a guy being radicalised by a sick group called IS.
This is about all of that, not just gun control or Muslim (religious) control. It is not an either/or it is an “and”.
As for FOX, geez do they really think a guy with a knife could kill 50 people and injure 50 more? Seriously? Morons.
I cannot for the life of me understand how people think it is okay to give high powered assault rifles to people for “protection”. I can almost accept a simple handgun (almost but don’t agree with that really) for protection but not this other stuff available. Morons the lot of them.
There’s no law over there to stop someone on a terrorism watch list or any kind of list from buying a gun. Even with a background check (which you don’t even have to do if it’s a private sale). Blame the NRA and it’s supporters who carry on like freaking idiots every time anything about gun control is challenged to the point where there is absolutely NO control.
What confuses me is the idea that it has to be one or the other. Let's say I accept that radicalised Muslims are a danger to society, which I totally do.
How does it follow that disarming them is a bad idea?
I don't understand that at all.
Yeah but it is not even a one or two issue, there are multiple issues that need to be addressed.
The guy was known as a wife basher and had a police record - domestic violence
The guy was known as “strange” or a “little crazy” by many - mental health issues The guy was being watched by the FBI and interviewed on 2 seperate occassions - radicalisation issues
So how did a guy who had violent tendencies, was being investigated by the FBI because people were reporting him and had a police record buy a high powered gun and ammunition?
This is about a failure in police procedures, a failure in FBI procedures, a failure in gun control and a failure to identify and help a guy being radicalised by a sick group called IS.
This is about all of that, not just gun control or Muslim (religious) control. It is not an either/or it is an “and”.
As for FOX, geez do they really think a guy with a knife could kill 50 people and injure 50 more? Seriously? Morons.
I cannot for the life of me understand how people think it is okay to give high powered assault rifles to people for “protection”. I can almost accept a simple handgun (almost but don’t agree with that really) for protection but not this other stuff available. Morons the lot of them.
There’s no law over there to stop someone on a terrorism watch list or any kind of list from buying a gun. Even with a background check (which you don’t even have to do if it’s a private sale). Blame the NRA and it’s supporters who carry on like freaking idiots every time anything about gun control is challenged to the point where there is absolutely NO control.
Apparently, if they are on a “No Fly” list, they can’t buy a gun.
What confuses me is the idea that it has to be one or the other. Let's say I accept that radicalised Muslims are a danger to society, which I totally do.
How does it follow that disarming them is a bad idea?
I don't understand that at all.
Yeah but it is not even a one or two issue, there are multiple issues that need to be addressed.
The guy was known as a wife basher and had a police record - domestic violence
The guy was known as “strange” or a “little crazy” by many - mental health issues The guy was being watched by the FBI and interviewed on 2 seperate occassions - radicalisation issues
So how did a guy who had violent tendencies, was being investigated by the FBI because people were reporting him and had a police record buy a high powered gun and ammunition?
This is about a failure in police procedures, a failure in FBI procedures, a failure in gun control and a failure to identify and help a guy being radicalised by a sick group called IS.
This is about all of that, not just gun control or Muslim (religious) control. It is not an either/or it is an “and”.
As for FOX, geez do they really think a guy with a knife could kill 50 people and injure 50 more? Seriously? Morons.
I cannot for the life of me understand how people think it is okay to give high powered assault rifles to people for “protection”. I can almost accept a simple handgun (almost but don’t agree with that really) for protection but not this other stuff available. Morons the lot of them.
There’s no law over there to stop someone on a terrorism watch list or any kind of list from buying a gun. Even with a background check (which you don’t even have to do if it’s a private sale). Blame the NRA and it’s supporters who carry on like freaking idiots every time anything about gun control is challenged to the point where there is absolutely NO control.
Apparently, if they are on a “No Fly” list, they can’t buy a gun.
I don’t think that’s correct.
I understand that you can be on a NFL and still be able to buy firearms legally - even without the loophole of 'no background checks if purchased from a fair/trade show or used.
i dont mind the general principle of the 2nd amendment, but it boggles the mind that they cant ban full-on military use smallarms without contravening it.
So a repressed gay guy pledges allegiance to a group who throw homosexuals from rooftops and then kills scores of fellow homosexuals? Meanwhile, a country -that if its going to put up with such gun laws desperately needs a cohesive mental health warning system- sits on its hands with warnings of said individual and does nothing whilst he purchases a slight variation on the weapon the gov issue to their own Marine Corp. All this a few months after said weapon was also used at San Berdino. (and Port Arthur fwiw).
FFS.
Edit: an estimated 5 million AR’s are held by civilian americans? for a country of such tensions and idiocy, the death toll is arguably low…
What confuses me is the idea that it has to be one or the other. Let's say I accept that radicalised Muslims are a danger to society, which I totally do.
How does it follow that disarming them is a bad idea?
I don't understand that at all.
Yeah but it is not even a one or two issue, there are multiple issues that need to be addressed.
The guy was known as a wife basher and had a police record - domestic violence
The guy was known as “strange” or a “little crazy” by many - mental health issues The guy was being watched by the FBI and interviewed on 2 seperate occassions - radicalisation issues
So how did a guy who had violent tendencies, was being investigated by the FBI because people were reporting him and had a police record buy a high powered gun and ammunition?
This is about a failure in police procedures, a failure in FBI procedures, a failure in gun control and a failure to identify and help a guy being radicalised by a sick group called IS.
This is about all of that, not just gun control or Muslim (religious) control. It is not an either/or it is an “and”.
As for FOX, geez do they really think a guy with a knife could kill 50 people and injure 50 more? Seriously? Morons.
I cannot for the life of me understand how people think it is okay to give high powered assault rifles to people for “protection”. I can almost accept a simple handgun (almost but don’t agree with that really) for protection but not this other stuff available. Morons the lot of them.
There’s no law over there to stop someone on a terrorism watch list or any kind of list from buying a gun. Even with a background check (which you don’t even have to do if it’s a private sale). Blame the NRA and it’s supporters who carry on like freaking idiots every time anything about gun control is challenged to the point where there is absolutely NO control.
Apparently, if they are on a “No Fly” list, they can’t buy a gun.
I don’t think that’s correct. I understand that you can be on a NFL and still be able to buy firearms legally - even without the loophole of 'no background checks if purchased from a fair/trade show or used.
Correct. Obama said exactly this in a talk at some point. Their congress doesn’t even allow the study of gun violence. That’s how ridiculous it is.
What confuses me is the idea that it has to be one or the other. Let's say I accept that radicalised Muslims are a danger to society, which I totally do.
How does it follow that disarming them is a bad idea?
I don't understand that at all.
Yeah but it is not even a one or two issue, there are multiple issues that need to be addressed.
The guy was known as a wife basher and had a police record - domestic violence
The guy was known as “strange” or a “little crazy” by many - mental health issues The guy was being watched by the FBI and interviewed on 2 seperate occassions - radicalisation issues
So how did a guy who had violent tendencies, was being investigated by the FBI because people were reporting him and had a police record buy a high powered gun and ammunition?
This is about a failure in police procedures, a failure in FBI procedures, a failure in gun control and a failure to identify and help a guy being radicalised by a sick group called IS.
This is about all of that, not just gun control or Muslim (religious) control. It is not an either/or it is an “and”.
As for FOX, geez do they really think a guy with a knife could kill 50 people and injure 50 more? Seriously? Morons.
I cannot for the life of me understand how people think it is okay to give high powered assault rifles to people for “protection”. I can almost accept a simple handgun (almost but don’t agree with that really) for protection but not this other stuff available. Morons the lot of them.
There’s no law over there to stop someone on a terrorism watch list or any kind of list from buying a gun. Even with a background check (which you don’t even have to do if it’s a private sale). Blame the NRA and it’s supporters who carry on like freaking idiots every time anything about gun control is challenged to the point where there is absolutely NO control.
Apparently, if they are on a “No Fly” list, they can’t buy a gun.
Watched a video from Obama saying that’s exactly the problem - that’s not the case.
“We can prevent them from getting on the plane but because of the 2nd amendment we can’t prevent them from buying a gun”
What confuses me is the idea that it has to be one or the other. Let's say I accept that radicalised Muslims are a danger to society, which I totally do.
How does it follow that disarming them is a bad idea?
I don't understand that at all.
Yeah but it is not even a one or two issue, there are multiple issues that need to be addressed.
The guy was known as a wife basher and had a police record - domestic violence
The guy was known as “strange” or a “little crazy” by many - mental health issues The guy was being watched by the FBI and interviewed on 2 seperate occassions - radicalisation issues
So how did a guy who had violent tendencies, was being investigated by the FBI because people were reporting him and had a police record buy a high powered gun and ammunition?
This is about a failure in police procedures, a failure in FBI procedures, a failure in gun control and a failure to identify and help a guy being radicalised by a sick group called IS.
This is about all of that, not just gun control or Muslim (religious) control. It is not an either/or it is an “and”.
As for FOX, geez do they really think a guy with a knife could kill 50 people and injure 50 more? Seriously? Morons.
I cannot for the life of me understand how people think it is okay to give high powered assault rifles to people for “protection”. I can almost accept a simple handgun (almost but don’t agree with that really) for protection but not this other stuff available. Morons the lot of them.
There’s no law over there to stop someone on a terrorism watch list or any kind of list from buying a gun. Even with a background check (which you don’t even have to do if it’s a private sale). Blame the NRA and it’s supporters who carry on like freaking idiots every time anything about gun control is challenged to the point where there is absolutely NO control.
Apparently, if they are on a “No Fly” list, they can’t buy a gun.
I don’t think that’s correct. I understand that you can be on a NFL and still be able to buy firearms legally - even without the loophole of 'no background checks if purchased from a fair/trade show or used.
Correct. Obama said exactly this in a talk at some point. Their congress doesn’t even allow the study of gun violence. That’s how ridiculous it is.
The bill to overturn that was rejected recently. It was to study firearm-related deaths and injuries under the health section, if i remember correctly. Astounding how that can happen. Seriously. The country’s political system is literally fundamentally flawed.
And for those who support the ‘Islam is the problem’ point of view, why aren’t they all shooting the place up? It’s in the Quran after all. Isn’t it? Those people you interact with every day. They should be trying to kill you. But they don’t. So what are they, crap at it?
4 Israeli’s were shot in a Tel Aviv restaurant and many more injured just last week, but no, you’re right, this is the first incident of its kind. I’m completely and utterly shocked this happened.
I would have thought that issue has more to do with one section of the community treating the other as sub-human rather than solely as a religious conflict but casting ‘them’ as terrorists has worked a treat since 2001 for the Israelis so no need to stop now.
Way too simplistic and not really based on reality. I suggest you meander over to Israel/Palestine and see what is really going on, not just an armchair/media report approach to your understanding.
Maybe you can take me. Sounds like you’ve been there a few times, yes?
And for those who support the ‘Islam is the problem’ point of view, why aren’t they all shooting the place up? It’s in the Quran after all. Isn’t it? Those people you interact with every day. They should be trying to kill you. But they don’t. So what are they, crap at it?
Ah, doesn’t the exact same logic apply to guns? If guns are the problem why isn’t every gun owner out killing?
Here’s just a thought, maybe there is no 1 problem or 1 solution. I think anyone who can’t see that access to guns & the type of weapons available is a massive problem, must be an idiot. I equally believe that anyone who can’t see that radicalised Islam is also a problem is just as big an idiot. Islam doesn’t have a patent on psychopathic murder creation but FFS its the current market leader.
And for those who support the ‘Islam is the problem’ point of view, why aren’t they all shooting the place up? It’s in the Quran after all. Isn’t it? Those people you interact with every day. They should be trying to kill you. But they don’t. So what are they, crap at it?
Ah, doesn’t the exact same logic apply to guns? If guns are the problem why isn’t every gun owner out killing?
Here’s just a thought, maybe there is no 1 problem or 1 solution. I think anyone who can’t see that access to guns & the type of weapons available is a massive problem, must be an idiot. I equally believe that anyone who can’t see that radicalised Islam is also a problem is just as big an idiot. Islam doesn’t have a patent on psychopathic murder creation but FFS its the current market leader.
Fanatical anything is bad.
Including -insert your religion or creed here-
fanatic
fəˈnatɪk/Submit
noun
1.
a person filled with excessive and single-minded zeal, especially for an extreme religious or political cause.
“religious fanatics”
synonyms: zealot, extremist, militant, dogmatist, devotee, sectarian, bigot, chauvinist, partisan, radical, diehard, ultra, activist, apologist, adherent; More
adjective
1.
filled with or expressing excessive zeal.
“his eyes had a fanatic iciness”
(oh, and I used to collect stamps when young - I still have them somewhere. Good times.
Sometimes I wonder if its guns that are the problem or guns PLUS our society here in the US. Heck, every Swiss household has a gun and you don’t see a shooting every day.
I read that gun violence kills 50 people EVERY 33 hours here in the US.