Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Saturday December 12 2015, @08:31AM   Printer-friendly
from the smoking-hotcakes dept.

Many Americans agree and are stocking up on weapons after the country's worst mass shooting in three years. Gun retailers are reporting surging sales, with customers saying they want to keep handguns and rifles at hand for self-defense in the event of another attack.

"Everyone is reporting up, every store, every salesman, every distributor," said Ray Peters, manager of Range, Guns & Safes, a company that sells firearms and safes in Atlanta with an indoor firing range. "People are more aware of the need to protect themselves."

[...] Gun sales were already on the rise this year. On Black Friday, the popular shopping day on Nov. 27 after the U.S. Thanksgiving Day holiday, a total of 185,345 applicants were processed through the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System, a 5.5 percent increase from the year before.

The Pew Research Center found last December that 57 percent of Americans say they believe owning a gun helps protect people from crime, up from 48 percent in 2012. The rest said owning a gun would put personal safety at risk.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 12 2015, @10:53PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 12 2015, @10:53PM (#275597)

    Oh please, a cut-n-paste job without any verifiable citations? That site you copied it from just skimmed the internet for any murders involving muslims and then relied on your lack of context to assume the worst. Especially when it comes to "honor killings" which happen in all faiths like the 8000 hindu bride burnings each year in India [telegraph.co.uk] and christians defending it in Australia [theaustralian.com.au]

    You bigots are so credulous.

  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday December 12 2015, @10:57PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday December 12 2015, @10:57PM (#275600) Journal

    That's your best? I demonstrate that Islam has been killing Americans for at least forty years, and all you can offer is, "Hindus do honor killings"??????

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 13 2015, @12:11AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 13 2015, @12:11AM (#275620)

      > I demonstrate that Islam has been killing Americans for at least forty years

      You demonstrated that some people who happen to be muslim have probably killed a couple of people a year for various reasons unknown and known, reasons that killers of all other faiths have claimed too. But that's how bigot logic works, its all about exclusively applying negative stereotypes to the group you wish to persecute.

    • (Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Sunday December 13 2015, @03:28AM

      by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Sunday December 13 2015, @03:28AM (#275661)

      How many years (centuries? millennia?) have America and other Western nations been interfering with and killing those in Islamic nations?

      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 13 2015, @06:55AM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 13 2015, @06:55AM (#275710) Journal

        That's a fair question, Joe - but it is also a question which exposes the hole in your knowledge of history. Off the top of my head, I'll say it's been just a wee bit more than 1000 years. But, I have to look to get an accurate answer. Why don't I just do that, and fill you in at the same time:

        The Rashidun had conquered Spain by the year 750 - so that's 1250 years ago that the Muslims were slaughtering "western" Europeans. By that time they had established their power all the way up into the Caucusus, which meant they were also slaughtering eastern Europeans.

        Islamic incursions into southern and central Italy came a little later - between 830 and 902.

        To be fair, I'm not a history scholar, and I'm not qualified to judge the accuracy of the wikipedia article - but it matches well enough with my knowledge of Islamic conquest of Europe.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquests [wikipedia.org]

        So, the answer to your question is, Muslims have been fucking around in the "western world" for about 1200 years.

        We might say that it's payback time, Baby!

        • (Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Sunday December 13 2015, @06:39PM

          by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Sunday December 13 2015, @06:39PM (#275817)

          Islam arose out of people who had been invaded and conquered by western nations (and others, like Persia) long before Mohammed showed up. The Greeks and Romans, to name a couple prominent ones off the top of my head, but they had been kicked around by just about everyone at some point, including each other. It is no wonder they turned towards conquest and empire when their strength was consolidated. Islam arose in the power vacuum amid polytheistic religions after the decline of Rome. As soon as they gained enough strength the various factions began their own quests as powers, but you can bet they still remembered the Romans. The invasion of Spain could be viewed as a re-establishment of connections lost when Rome destroyed Carthage, the peoples of the region were allies of Carthage and constantly at war with Rome, and Moorish Spain matched those boundaries almost exactly.

          • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday December 13 2015, @07:16PM

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday December 13 2015, @07:16PM (#275823) Journal

            I suppose that point of view isn't really invalid. But, it's one that I can't agree with. As you mention, the people of the mideast/Arabia/Persia/North Africa had been feuding for ages, before during and after Greek and Roman times.

            Islam was a late comer to this whole thing. It was hundreds of years after Christ that Mohammed came along.

            Bearing in mind that Mohammed rejected philosophy, along with all previous religions, as well as all previous governments, I can't really accept that Islam has some heritage to claim in Europe. Islam kept Jehovah, and a few trappings from the Moon god. It claimed no connection to Persia, or to any of the civilizations of the Tigirs and Euphrates, to Egypt, or to any other civilization or culture. Islam was the new kid on the block, without a heritage.

            True to their master's word, they went conquering. I never saw that they were seeking vengeance on the Romans, or anyone else. They went conquering, and any who refused to worship the One God, according to the edicts of the imams, was to be put to death, or enslaved.

            It's just a bit hard for me to credit the Muslims with re-establishing any eastern influence in the west. The old nations were less than ghosts, and Islam rejected the ghosts. I just can't see it.

            • (Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Monday December 14 2015, @05:51PM

              by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Monday December 14 2015, @05:51PM (#276214)

              I'm not saying that most of it was entirely a conscious effort, but that Islam arose from that environment, although with nearly a thousand years of Carthage in Spain there were blood ties established. All those petty tribal feuds among the Arabs, their continually suffering invasions from more powerful neighboring nations, all led to their doing the same once Islam allowed their own power to be consolidated to the point they were powerful enough to do it themselves. Had some other force been able to unite them, the same sort of events would likely have followed. After all, there are biblical precedents for much of what Islam did in conquering neighbors, look up the Book of Numbers, Chapter 31.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 14 2015, @06:22PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 14 2015, @06:22PM (#276230)

                You could also argue that the religion is in fact somewhat orthogonal. Different empires became powerful. The religion their leaders and people adhered to became powerful as a consequence. E.g. Christianity become powerful in the Mediterranean not because the cult was particularly different than many others throughout the region, but just because it happened to be chosen by enough Roman leaders. It is likely some religion would be chosen. A particular one being chosen may just be the random chance of social interaction and the luck of powerful people picking it. Another example is Latin America. Conquered by Spain, they became heavily Catholic because Spain was Catholic. The same argument holds for Islam. It may not be popular because of anything particular interesting about the religion (not that much different really than Christian or even Jewish Religions), but because it was The Religion of successful empires.

                • (Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Tuesday December 15 2015, @05:59PM

                  by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Tuesday December 15 2015, @05:59PM (#276728)

                  While that is true, there are factors which help "choose" one religion over another.

                  Christianity become powerful in the Mediterranean not because the cult was particularly different than many others throughout the region, but just because it happened to be chosen by enough Roman leaders.

                  I think it was probably chosen by Roman leaders because they realized it was a perfect religion for helping control masses of poor people who were probably not enjoying their current life very much. Combine a doctrine that promises eternal reward for the "good" (obedient?) and much propagandizing of the virtues of being poor and suffering with at the same time a worship of feudal/monarchical/hierarchical authority and it is no surprise Roman leaders grabbed onto it in the declining days of the empire.

                  The same argument holds for Islam. It may not be popular because of anything particular interesting about the religion (not that much different really than Christian or even Jewish Religions), but because it was The Religion of successful empires.

                  I spent a good part of an evening years ago reading part of the history of Islam on the Albawaba website (over a 56k modem). I lost interest when it changed from a spiritual doctrine to Allah "commanding" Mohammed to attack and conquer various entities to gain their wealth and power. I think Islam succeeded so well because it is a perfect religion for allowing relatively well off leaders to encourage those underneath them to sacrifice themselves for the gain of the leader, promising them an eternal reward much greater than they were going to see in their actual lives.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 14 2015, @05:07PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 14 2015, @05:07PM (#276188)

      I demonstrate that Islam has been killing Americans for at least forty years, and all you can offer is,

      Different AC here, but I think you could argue that people claiming Muslim faith have been killing, and even enslaving, Americans for much longer than 40 years. The Barbary War is the first thing that pops to my mind which really indicates Muslims killing Americans since the beginnings of the US. But by the same token, you could also that people claiming the Christian faith have been killing, and even enslaving, Americans for the life of the Republic. In fact, I think it's a pretty safe bet that many, many more Americans have been killed and enslaved by self described Christians than by self described Muslims.

      So if we follow the logic that since some Muslims have killed Americans therefore we should be afraid and protect ourselves from Muslims in general, then we should also be even more afraid and even quicker to protect ourselves from Christians in general. Personally, I think this points out the ridiculousness of the original argument. But if you are arguing for protecting ourselves from Muslims and Christians and heck, lets just make it all religions (register the churches?, kick them out of the country?, disarm theme?, arm ourselves and keep a wary eye on them?, whatever), then at least the argument would be consistent.

      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 14 2015, @06:48PM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday December 14 2015, @06:48PM (#276245) Journal

        I had to look back and make sure where we are here.

        "Americans stock up on weapons after California shooting" Got it. Bottom line is, looney toons are running around killing us, and it doesn't make a huge difference who is doing the killing. We have a right to stock up on weapons, so that if a Syrian, a Russian, a Briton, or a North or South or Central American attacks us, we can kill back.

        That goes equally for any race, religion, ethnicity, or political affiliation. As Americans, we have the right to defend ourselves.

        Now, as for Islam, I wish everyone would stop thinking of it as a religion. Islam is a complete political, religious, judicial, and philosophical system. Islam has gone back into history about 6 thousand years, and reincarnated something like the original prophets, kings, and judges of the Old Testament. Nice, self contained culture, independent of any outside influence. THAT is far more dangerous than a simple religion.

        And, yes, I'm perfectly willing to just tell them they can't come here any more. And, I'm willing to defend that decision with weapons.