[Closed] Orlando shootings, 20 shot

Terrible news. Feel sorry for them and all the other people around the world suffering.

Violence sucks.

It seems another guy was arrested in Santa Monica, who was planning to attack the Gay Pride Parade. He had three assault rifles, high capacity magazines and [i]"a 5 gallon bucket with chemicals capable of forming an improvised explosive device"[/i].

[img] :large[/img]
https://twitter.com/PattersonNBC/status/742107750012882944

a tactical shotgun is handy for close-quarters use backup, but I wouldn't rely on it.

you sound like a "good guy with a gun"...

There are 360 million guns in America, you will never remove them from circulation even if you could deal with the Constitutional Right to bear arms. You can make it a bit more difficult to buy one but a terrorist can always make a bomb and the number of illegally held weapons will only increase.

Some interesting background to Florida gun ownership I've just come across on Flipboard:
http://qz.com/704939/the-ar-15-is-the-gun-of-choice-for-mass-shootings-and-its-easier-to-buy-in-florida-than-a-pistol/
And this, well, for all her faults, I'm really hoping Hillary gets in because reading this has made me just a little bit sick in my mouth:
http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/12/11913614/donald-trump-orlando-shooting

There are 360 million guns in America, you will never remove them from circulation... the number of illegally held weapons will only increase.

Isn't that part of how you deal with it though?

People often trot out the [i]"bad guys will always get guns"[/i] line and it is a fair point, especially in a society where guns are everywhere.

But if you make (for example) AR-15s illegal, then you know that (after a suitable amnesty period) anyone with an AR-15 is "a bad guy" - they can be arrested and questioned and the weapon can be destroyed.

The bad guys aren't daft. They will move onto something else that they can legally carry without risking arrest. So the number of AR-15s in circulation slowly decreases over time.

It will never be a quick fix - but the only other alternative seems to be more guns.

I worked in Georgia, Alabama, Arkansa with blue collar individuals who 100% believed the following-
1. Guns are good (lots of guns better)
2. The UK health care system is crap (because it's free for all members of society)
3. God supports America
4. All minorities are un American
They have no external influence (few have ever travelled outside the state they live in) hence mass shootings are normal.

One good old boy from Arkansa said to me we all get what we deserve in life - just try and get your head around that statement

The best explanation I've heard for why guns are so widespread in US society goes something like this. You need guns in order to overthrow the government if they overstep the mark. Civilians can rise up and join forces. Of course, when you're against the US army, assault rifles are more effective than pistols. This is the way of things, it's just how it is. Guns are everywhere and acceptable.

If you accept that this is deeply entrenched in the psyche of many Americans, then attempts to remove them are an affront to your way of life. Imagine someone in the UK tells you that you don't need your car. Cars are dangerous, they kill, pollute and cause traffic. Wouldn't we all be better off on bikes / public transport / taxis? To an extent I think that's a fair analogy. The thought of me losing my car (and as a consequence my independence) fills me with a nausea that's entirely irrational.

From the cross-channel view it seems like madness but I guess when you're living it, you lose that perspective.

Which is all fine apart from when you start with the phrase:-

You need guns in order to overthrow the government if they overstep the mark

Which sounds so preposterous that everything after it is drivel. Weird how in every other nation in the civilised democratic world we all seem to sleep at night without 'knowing' we could storm the government (that we elected) with the pee shooter (in weaponry trump trumps terms) under our beds. And that's before you get on to the fact that the ones with the assault rifles are the inbred hicks without the intelligence to coordinate anything sophisticated enough like bringing down the one of the most well armed governments in the world. I guess until they get a grip on that concept they have no hope.

Apologies if already mentioned - That's 176 times this year that more than 4 people have lost their lives at a time in shootings in the US.

Deplorable.

Indeed - the slightly trite sound bite is that the UK has had 7 mass shootings in the last 150 years, the US has had 7 in the last week.

Which sounds so preposterous that everything after it is drivel

Hmm, perhaps less preposterous if your entire family and social collective memory, the tales you hear from your childhood, involve your direct ancestors fleeing from state persecution.

And I don't just mean the Jews

The fear of government tyranny utterly pervades American society, from the 'Irish' to the post war immigration from Germany and Poland, those fleeing The expanding Eastern Bloc (failed Hungarian revolution, East Germany, etc.) Korea, Cambodia, Vietnam, Cuba, Africa, the list goes on.

And let's not forget those with their own more domestic history of state oppression:
[IMG] [/IMG]

I'm not one to say 'check your privilege' but you and I come from a society and culture where hundreds of years of stable and democratic government is a given, many Americans don't.

"Parents against gun violence" does one of these every month:
[img] [/img]
What strikes me is they're the kind of things where if there wasn't a gun you'd throw something at the other person or leave a passive aggressive note, or let down the tyres on their car. But the impulsive "of

The best explanation I've heard for why guns are so widespread in US society goes something like this. You need guns in order to overthrow the government if they overstep the mark.

bails

"Parents against gun violence" does one of these every month:

So I guess next month's one will say, "I saw two gay guys kissing so I decided to murder 50 of them".

But try to find exactly where the constitution says that...

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The thing is, the second amendment is shit. Just change it.

America is increasingly becoming an international laughing stock.

I understand this attack might start a discussion here about gun control but as a terrorist incident its not going to lead to much of a similar call in the US.

Hmm, perhaps less preposterous if your entire family and social collective memory, the tales you hear from your childhood, involve your direct ancestors fleeing from state persecution.
And I don't just mean the Jews

All the reasons are bull shit. It's not a normal way to live and deal with things.

Have these advocates seen the guns their Government has got though? That argument is nonsense, a hill of AR15s wont last long against a fleet of drones.

So sad, the victims, their families friends and the community will be in my thoughts this week. 😥

I get the argument that bad guys will always find the means to get guns from somewhere (as they did for the Paris attacks) or will find another means to wreak their destruction. It's an inevitability of the world nowadays.

What surprises me in this case is he was interviewed 3 times by the FBI. They must have had suspicions. Yet he was then free to buy an assault rifle a week ago without it somehow flagging up. Surely gun ownership matched against people of interest to the FBI has to be being done?

Or is it that the privacy laws / campaigners think that's too Big Brothery, because weapons are legal and they didn't find anything against him?

To my simple mind if someone said "Hey, you know that guy we interviewed on a tip off but didn't find anything against; he's just bought an assault rifle, and 4 magazines of bullets....." - I'd be checking that out PDQ.

And this, well, for all her faults, I'm really hoping Hillary gets in because reading this has made me just a little bit sick in my mouth:
http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/12/11913614/donald-trump-orlando-shooting

Completely agree with you on this one CountZero, it made my stomach turn............ 🙁

[quote
http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/12/11913614/donald-trump-orlando-shooting

I've said this before: it astounds me that people treat the Second Amendment as an unalterable truth that cannot even be questioned.

Yet many of those same people are vocal supporters of Trump's [i]"let's just ban all muslims"[/i] plan which is a massive violation of the [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution ]First Amendment[/url].

And this, well, for all her faults, I'm really hoping Hillary gets in because reading this has made me just a little bit sick in my mouth:

I agree, but remember one of her faults was being fiercely opposed to gay marriage. Definitely Hobsons choice.

The right to bear arms? I thought it was this:

[img] [/img]

The sooner American 2nd Amendment-ists understand the world has changed the better. As others have said it's insane if they think they can overthrow the government. Even those militias who declare their own countries must know they're only still there because the government doesn't care enough to storm their compounds or bomb them from the air.

The first step in lowering the number of deaths by shooting is to make guns hard to own. Australia managed it. From Wikipedia:

Following the National Agreement on Firearms, the number of deaths by firearms in Australia, initially declined slowly. Overall homicides immediately after, saw a decrease of less than one per 100,000 persons. Over the medium term homicide by firearm dropped from 1/200,000 to 1/670,000.[26]

Between 2010-2014, gun related homicides across all of Australia had dropped to 30-40 per year. Firearms in 2014 were used in less than 15% of homicides, less than 0.1% of sexual assaults, less than 6% of kidnapping/abductions and 8% of robberies.[27]

Since the 1996 legislation the risk of dying by gunshots was reduced by 50% in the following years and stayed on that lower level since then. The rate of gun related suicide was greatly reduced as well.[25]

Suicides by firearm were already declining; however they fell significantly after controls, dropping around 50% in two years.[28] Overall suicide rates remained steady until a slight drop in 2003, followed by stable rates since then.[26]

The government spent 500M buying back guns from people and it SEEMS to have had the desired effect. In 6 months, the US has had almost 1000 murders with a firearm per month. The Australian numbers scaled for the population would be around 43 per month.

I agree, but remember one of her faults was being fiercely opposed to gay marriage. Definitely Hobsons choice.

There's a slight difference though between being against same-sex marriage and wanting all the gay people and brown people rounded up and shot / deported.

Ie, she might be the lesser of two evils, but she's [i]significantly[/i] the lesser of two evils.

Yet many of those same people are vocal supporters of Trump's "let's just ban all muslims" plan which is a massive violation of the First Amendment.

Yes, it's a dilemma isn't it?

But then you could also make the argument that (further) restricting guns based upon the violent and murderous actions of a small minority of owners makes no more sense than banning all Muslims based upon the actions of a tiny minority.

I think that it's unfortunate that ISIS can claim responsibility just because the chap in question pledged his allegiance to them at the last minute.

He was a loser, losers get attracted to lots of different religions and use them to fuel and justify their hatred. That's what drove him to kill and I hope the media remembers that, he wasn't driven to kill by a murky political religious ideology. That would be giving the scumbag far too much credit.

Society needs to recognise that religion attracts a lot of already disturbed individuals in the first place, selection bias if you will - once there is some recognition of that, then perhaps better mental healthcare and education would help?

I've yet to hear a cogent answer as to why anyone would need an assault rifle....

If you want to shoot something that powerful join the Army!

I think that it's unfortunate that ISIS can claim responsibility just because the chap in question pledged his allegiance to them at the last minute.

Did he? Everything I've read / heard so far has said we "wasn't very religious."

I've yet to hear a cogent answer as to why anyone would need an assault rifle....

Home defence through superior firepower!!1!

After the last mass shooting to get big media attention the NRA specifically pointed out it was unconstitutional to ban gun sales to potential Terrorists and maintained their opposition to any such erosion of the 2nd amendment!
This is yet another avoidable tragedy.

Hardly anyone owns an 'assault rifle'

They own semi automatic rifles, 'black rifles' as they are called - the whole 'assault weapons' thing is made up, it's purely cosmetic.

There are plenty of semi automatic magazine fed rifles in the states, have been for donkeys years, there is little functional difference between an SKS or Mini14, even an M1 garand (that has been the mainstay of US shooting for decades) and the 'AR15' style rifles that the media is banging on about.

As for 'powerful' - utter nonsense, the 'black rifles' are far less powerful than most hunting rifles.

@Cougar

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/12/us/orlando-nightclub-shooting/

Tom_W1987 - Member

I think that it's unfortunate that ISIS can claim responsibility just because the chap in question pledged his allegiance to them at the last minute.

Apart from his previous contact with an American suicide bomber and other extremist ramblings which got him into trouble with the FBI.

He was a loser, losers get attracted to lots of different religions and use them to fuel and justify their hatred.

He was born and raised a muslim though.

That's what drove him to kill and I hope the media remembers that, he wasn't driven to kill by a murky political religious ideology.

And yet his ideology matches up pretty nicely to Wahabbism. Or just Islam, depending of course on interpretation.

Society needs to recognise that religion attracts a lot of already disturbed individuals in the first place, selection bias if you will -

How many of these disturbed individuals are attracted to Catholocism, or COE, or Judaism?

How many of these disturbed individuals are attracted to Catholocism, or COE, or Judaism?

He had been reported to the FBI for having extremist views. They interviewed him and said they could not bring any charges (also imo this meams you can't stop him buying a gun)
His father has links to the Taliban
His wife has now said he beat her

Yes its press coverage in the wake of a terrorist mass killing but there seems to be an increasing amount of evidence pointing at a radiclaised individual

@Graham you need to speak to Americans about the importance of the Constitution, then you would understand why all of it is defended so passionately

Trump said "ban" Muslims [b]until we can figure out whats going on[/b] very controversial of course but a politically effective move not least as it shows that the current Government does not know whats going on.

Hey Jim,

I don't know, I just have a hunch that for example, second or third generation Muslims can often become more "devout" and eventually become extremists because they don't succeed in their country of birth - their country of birth never quite feeling like their own. Blame gets place on external factors and they retreat into themselves via religion, IMO that is a psychological issue first and a religious issue second.

What that means is that I think that it is important that society needs to be able to start recognising individuals who are going down that route - again, better mental health support and actually - mental health education where it is taught in a classroom setting.

^^^ second or third generation is important. IMO the parents know they have moved to a better country but often try and preserve importantbelements of their original life which are often inconsistent with their new home. The kids feel a sense of a lack of identity as they are not local or from their ethnic home. We then have an environment where radicalisation breeds and promises of a myhthical uptopia can flourish.

He was born and raised a muslim though.

But the guy they arrested in Santa Monica, sat in his car with three assault rifles, high capacity magazines and 5 gallons of explosive material who was on his way to the Gay Pride parade: we're happy he is just "mentally ill" ?

Must be. He's white American.

It's quite telling to see how quickly the media jumped on the "Islamic Extremist" angle of the Orlando shooter, before any real details were known and despite those close to him saying that he wasn't particularly religious but was mentally unstable.

Yet the Santa Monica guy's religion hasn't been mentioned, that I have seen. I guess it must be irrelevant, he's just mentally unstable.

Although to be fair Graham, that guy didn't pledge allegiance to a religious movement that condones killing gay people.

But I sort of agree with your sentiment, however, it's inevitable that the media would report this.

I just think that it's unfortunate that A) ISIS can capitalise on this incident B) A discussion about the real causes of home grown terror may be missed in the "ZOMFG ISIS" fallout.

What that means is that I think that it is important that society needs to be able to start recognising individuals who are going down that route - again, better mental health support and actually - mental health education where it is taught in a classroom setting.

It's a very interesting conversation to start - would America be in the mess it's in if they had an NHS? Are mass shootings and gun crime just a symptom of deeper societal issues of social exclusion and poverty rather than a problem with guns, certainly that's the line that Michael Moore went down with bowling for Columbine, but things like that are expensive and difficult to tackle, much easier to just blame guns.

In the UK, some feel we have developed a situation where people with firearm certificates are almost paranoid to go to the doctor for fear of losing their guns (think about someone taking your bike away) as a 'preventative' measure - so we end up magnifying the risk of characters like Derek Bird, because we are afraid to talk about mental health and discuss risk. I know of someone recently who had his guns taken away after reporting to the doctors with chest pains (diagnosed with a minor cardiac problem similar to angina), he is fighting that decision at the moment, but I can't see how that raises his risk profile to the point of taking away his Guns, thus having to leave his job.

Not far from here, we have a society with a deeply ingrained gun culture - not without their problems, and yes they have had mass shootings, but if you get over to Switzerland it's pretty illuminating:

Caution, guns, beer and yodelling content.

Tom_W1987 - Member

Hey Jim,

I don't know, I just have a hunch that for example, second or third generation Muslims can often become more "devout" and eventually become extremists because they don't succeed in their country of birth - their country of birth never quite feeling like their own. Blame gets place on external factors and they retreat into themselves via religion, IMO that is a psychological issue first and a religious issue second.

What that means is that I think that it is important that society needs to be able to start recognising individuals who are going down that route - again, better mental health support and actually - mental health education where it is taught in a classroom setting.

I don't disagree. But. If a Syrian arrived in the UK tomorrow with the exact same beliefs we wouldn't say he was mentally disturbed or unstable. That would be cultural.

As I said on page one, Saudi Arabia is spending billions educating the worlds poor in their own world view. Plenty of children growing up in the poorest parts of the middle east and africa will only receive an education which is tailored to a Sunni Wahhabist world view. That's not OMFG ISIS. That's just a sad fact that points towards future unrest.

GrahamS - Member

He was born and raised a muslim though.

But the guy they arrested in Santa Monica, sat in his car with three assault rifles, high capacity magazines and 5 gallons of explosive material who was on his way to the Gay Pride parade: we're happy he is just "mentally ill" ?

Must be. He's white American.

It's quite telling to see how quickly the media jumped on the "Islamic Extremist" angle of the Orlando shooter, before any real details were known and despite those close to him saying that he wasn't particularly religious but was mentally unstable.

Yet the Santa Monica guy's religion hasn't been mentioned, that I have seen. I guess it must be irrelevant, he's just mentally unstable.

So, lets assume they both had succeeded. One Muslim religious nutter. One christian religious nutter (just assuming he was a christian).

Would there be Christian groups jumping to claim responsibility for James Howell's actions?

Would there be large swathes of Christians who would feel that what he did was justified? Where would these people be? Africa maybe?

I cannot work it out apparently the Muslims don't integrate yet we all know what its like for them and become experts n the inward turmoil of second and third generation Muslims

IMRL*E

2md generation - bilingual- have been "home"
3rd generation - not really bilingual are at home have never been "abroad"

everything else is depends on factors not related to number of generations

He was born and raised a muslim though.

*Relatively Limited - about 4 close friends[2nd generation] and their kids[3rd]

@Graham you need to speak to Americans about the importance of the Constitution, then you would understand why all of it is defended so passionately

Trump said "ban" Muslims until we can figure out whats going on very controversial of course but a politically effective move not least as it shows that the current Government does not know whats going on.

I get that the constitution is important to Americans. It seems to be practically a religious artefact to some Americans.

That's why it baffles me that they are happy for Trump to suggest breaching the First Amendment "until we can figure out whats going on" - yet breaching the Second Amendment by banning assault weapons "until we can figure out whats going on" seems like it would create a civil war.

It's even odder given that [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban ]they used to have a ban on assault weapons[/url], but they let it expire in 2004.

the constitution never had an issue giving the dark skinned folk less freedom than the white skinned folk .

It's even odder given that they used to have a ban on assault weapons, but they let it expire in 2004.