Mass shooting in Orlando - Politics

[markw]

Because Christians haven't killed each other in droves through the centuries over petty differences, right?



Spend a couple months living in a Palestinian refugee camp. See if it makes you just a little angry. Never mind all the other issues with that debacle....

Now you're grasping at straws... If that's the best you cane come up with, it's been nice playing.

 

[everettT]

A brief history of American gun laws.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/07/politics/gun-control-america-history-timeline/

 

[GO-NAD!]

Now you're grasping at straws... If that's the best you cane come up with, it's been nice playing.

I don't think Steve is grasping here, Mark. We've caused thousands of civilian casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq - most of them accidentally. But, that's cold comfort to those people. And, when they live in societies where the truth is what local power brokers with an agenda tell them, we are as bad as any terrorist, in their eyes.

That doesn't justify terrorist attacks, but we can't - or shouldn't - paint an entire group of people with the same brush.

 

[Steve81]

Now you're grasping at straws...

Funny coming from a guy who grasps at straws like "well Muslims kill each other too." Let's face facts Mark, Christians and Muslims have killed themselves and each other for ages. Europe was never anything resembling a bastion of peace. Not all the wars were inspired by religion (though several were), but millions upon millions of Christians died fighting other Christians all the same. Rewind the clock a scant 100 years (a blink in history), and you'll find Europe embroiled in one of the bloodiest wars in history. That we have relative peace now is more a function of circumstance (i.e. the horrific cost of a modern, potentially nuclear large scale war) vs the West becoming a bunch of enlightened pacifists.

 

[Chu Gai]

Trust me, I have. I know what the radicals think of us. I also know that not all Muslims feel that way. A wise man once wrote:

Not all but it bears keeping in mind that According to a 2015 Pew Research poll, a majority of Muslims in the Middle East, South Asia and Southeast Asia favor making sharia the official law in their countries –– with support often rising above 80%. Like take Pakistan which looked to pass a law protecting women but was met with opposition by clerics who essentially said, that's Un-Islamic. There are times when it's justifiable to beat a woman.

 

[Chu Gai]

I don't think Steve is grasping here, Mark. We've caused thousands of civilian casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq - most of them accidentally. But, that's cold comfort to those people. And, when they live in societies where the truth is what local power brokers with an agenda tell them, we are as bad as any terrorist, in their eyes.

That doesn't justify terrorist attacks, but we can't - or shouldn't - paint an entire group of people with the same brush.

Hard to argue against that. However noble may have been our intentions, in Muslim countries, it's only acceptable if they're the ones killing each other. If the US blows up a mosque, there's world wide condemnation. If a Muslim faction does, not so much.

 

[Chu Gai]

You are not alone:

We don't have fully automatic weapons available for sale and haven't for quite some time.

 

[Steve81]

Not all but it bears keeping in mind that According to a 2015 Pew Research poll, a majority of Muslims in the Middle East, South Asia and Southeast Asia favor making sharia the official law in their countries –– with support often rising above 80%. Like take Pakistan which looked to pass a law protecting women but was met with opposition by clerics who essentially said, that's Un-Islamic. There are times when it's justifiable to beat a woman.

I suspect you'll find similar leanings in many non-industrialized nations, regardless of religion.

 

[markw]

I don't think Steve is grasping here, Mark. We've caused thousands of civilian casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq - most of them accidentally. But, that's cold comfort to those people. And, when they live in societies where the truth is what local power brokers with an agenda tell them, we are as bad as any terrorist, in their eyes.

That doesn't justify terrorist attacks, but we can't - or shouldn't - paint an entire group of people with the same brush.

It's not just North America they hate. They are doing their best to purge Christianity from any countries they come into contact with.

https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/christian-attacks.aspx

Please note all these targeted were innocent, mostly helpless civilians, particularly women and children.

Yeah, a real stand up bunch of guys.

So much for that "America deserved it"

 

[Steve81]

It's not just North America they hate.

To understand why they don't just hate the US, it helps to understand what happened to the remnants of the Ottoman Empire after WWI. Hint: they didn't let the people hold a vote to determine what should happen, let the locals draw the borders, and so on. Understanding that might also give you some idea of why that region of the world isn't the epitome of stability today.

 

[markw]

To understand why they don't just hate the US, it helps to understand what happened to the remnants of the Ottoman Empire after WWI. Hint: they didn't let the people hold a vote to determine what should happen, let the locals draw the borders, and so on. Understanding that might also give you some idea of why that region of the world isn't the epitome of stability today.

So, you're actually justifying their brutality?

 

[Steve81]

So, you're actually justifying their brutality?

Justify? No. But I understand some of the causative factors behind it.

 

[markw]

That's no excuse for their wanton brutality against any and everyone, particularly "infidels".

that's a bunch of disturbed, depraved peoples.

If you've got a bowl of M&M's and know only 5% are poison, would you go in and grab a handful?

 

[Rickster71]

You are not alone:

Here's a link with some info for those that may not know the differences between gun types.
Fully automatic guns have not been available to civilians since 1934.
http://www.assaultweapon.info/

 

[Swerd]

FWIW, on the radio while driving to work this morning, I heard a smart phone recording of the gunfire in the night club. It sounded to me like a sustained but very rapid (less than ~2 seconds) burst, followed by a pause as if replacing the clip, and then more rapid fire, several times over and over in sequence.

It's been many years since I heard an M-16 on auto fire, but it sure sounded like that to me. This did not sound like semi-automatic rapid fire.

It has also been reported that the shooter recently attempted to buy body armor, but the store clerk or owner refused to sell it to him.

The person who made the phone recording did not survive.

 

[Steve81]

That's no excuse for their wanton brutality against any and everyone, particularly "infidels".

Of course not, but that sword cuts both ways.

that's a bunch of disturbed, depraved peoples.

Who, ISIS? Absolutely.

 

[jinjuku]

You try being gay in Georgia.

Hell, try operating a Yoga studio in Georgia...

 

[KEW]

We don't have fully automatic weapons available for sale and haven't for quite some time.

Here's a link with some info for those that may not know the differences between gun types.
Fully automatic guns have not been available to civilians since 1934.
http://www.assaultweapon.info/

Yeah, President Reagan was mistaken to use the term machine gun. The school shooting which prompted his statement only involved a semi-automatic weapon.

More background available via Snopes:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/reaganak47.asp

Reagan erred in his use of terminology: The type of weapon used by Patrick Purdy, and referenced by Reagan in his comment, was actually a semi-automatic version of the AK-47, not a "machine gun." In 1994 Reagan was a co-signatory (along with former presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter) to a letter urging the U.S. House of Representatives to support a ban on the domestic manufacture of "assault weapons" such as semi-automatic AK-47s:

But a quick Google search for "AK-47 conversion" gets a 2 minute video (of what looks like a high school kid) explaining how to convert the AK-47 to an automatic weapon. It sounds like 5 minutes with a Dremel will do the job handily!

There is no way to tell a automatic from a legal weapon short of disassembly or firing it. I don't know what the police would need to be able to take your gun from you to disassemble it. So it sounds like this guy would have the confidence of knowing he is essentially immune to prosecution until he shoots his first victim (maybe when he walked into the bar...which is probably about the same point in time, I suspect he shot any bouncers at the door first thing?)

The idea of legally being able to buy the fire-power to allow one person acting alone to execute "the biggest terrorist act since 911" seems insane to me. FWIW, my ex-marine friend thinks he could have carried out this massacre equally well with the semi-automatic version. However, I know I would have a lot more confidence if I had the automatic version in my hands.

 

[Steve81]

But a quick Google search for "AK-47 conversion" gets a 2 minute video (of what looks like a high school kid) explaining how to convert the AK-47 to an automatic weapon. It sounds like 5 minutes with a Dremel will do the job handily!

As I understand it, you'd need an open bolt weapon to have something that's "readily converted" to full auto. As you'll note from the wiki entry, those haven't been legal in some time. Wiki's National Firearms Act entry provides a little more clarification

The National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) defines a number of categories of regulated firearms. These weapons are collectively known as NFA firearms and include the following:

Machine guns—this includes any firearm which can fire more than 1 cartridge per trigger pull. Both continuous fully automatic fire and "burst fire" (e.g., firearms with a 3-round burst feature) are considered machine gun features. The weapon's receiver is by itself considered to be a regulated firearm. A non-machinegun that may be converted to fire more than one shot per trigger pull by ordinary mechanical skills is determined to be "readily convertible", and classed as a machinegun, such as a KG-9 pistol (pre-ban ones are "grandfathered").

In any case, it takes more than grinding down a sear to make a useful (read: selective fire) automatic weapon that's not likely to just blow up in your face. I'd suggest the latter part is what you're likely to get if you take advice on modifying firearms from kids on youtube.

 

[Rickster71]

It's sounding more and more like our government dropped the ball.
Disney security officials told the FBI they believe Mateen visited Disney World on April 26 to conduct surveillance, a law enforcement official told CNN.
(This happened after the FBI investigated him twice)

Mateen's wife also was with him on the Disney World visit. Federal authorities have questioned Salman, who told them, according to a law enforcement official, that her husband had talked about a jihadist attack but she denied knowing he planned to attack the gay club.

More than a month after that Disney World trip, Mateen and his wife visited Pulse and Disney Springs -- an entertainment and shopping complex -- apparently to scout out the locations, a law enforcement official said. Authorities believe he was conducting surveillance, based on information learned in interviews.