Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
Breaking News
posted by takyon on Sunday June 12 2016, @06:00PM   Printer-friendly

A suspected Islamic terrorist opened fire at a gay nightclub in Florida, killing 50 people and wounding another 53 before he was killed by police. While authorities continue to investigate to determine whether this man had ties to ISIS, the terror organization has not been quiet in praising the attack. This comes three days after ISIS announced they would attack somewhere in Florida. Today's attack marks the largest act of terrorism on US soil since 9/11.

takyon: The gunman reportedly called 911 emergency services to pledge allegiance to ISIS. The President will hold a briefing momentarily. Compare this article to the original submission.


Original Submission   Late submission by physicsmajor

 
This discussion has been archived.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: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Sunday June 12 2016, @06:13PM

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Sunday June 12 2016, @06:13PM (#358735) Journal

    Obama brings up gun control about 3 minutes in. The statement lasted just about 5 minutes.

    Both the President and the one news outlet I listened to earlier, NPR (someone being interviewed maybe 15 minutes before the briefing), mentioned that the attack targeted LGBT and specifically transgendered people. I wonder if this attack could/will be used to repel the recent wave of anti-transgendered hate.

    Here are the latest tweets from the Donald [twitter.com]:

    Horrific incident in FL. Praying for all the victims & their families. When will this stop? When will we get tough, smart & vigilant?

    Appreciate the congrats for being right on radical Islamic terrorism, I don't want congrats, I want toughness & vigilance. We must be smart!

    Is President Obama going to finally mention the words radical Islamic terrorism? If he doesn't he should immediately resign in disgrace!

    Context of the second tweet above is apparently people sending messages to him saying that he was right or whatever.

    Also, outlets are reporting that the LAPD arrested a man heading to the West Hollywood Pride Parade with assault rifles (explosives also mentioned):

    http://fox6now.com/2016/06/12/tmz-deputies-will-have-shooter-gear-during-west-hollywood-pride-parade/ [fox6now.com]
    http://www.cbs46.com/story/32202842/man-arrested-with-guns-explosives-headed-to-los-angeles-gay-pride-parade [cbs46.com]

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @06:29PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @06:29PM (#358747)

    > Also, outlets are reporting that the LAPD arrested a man heading to the West Hollywood Pride Parade with assault rifles (explosives also mentioned):

    After every event like this there are a buzz of reports. After the chattanooga shooting there were reports of shootings in malls in near by towns, they all turned out to be false. Give it some time before taking anything seriously.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @06:35PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @06:35PM (#358752)

    Trump has positioned whatever he says so he 'sounds right'. It is a sales technique. I have not read his book. I have read many others. It is called positioning. Hillary just is not as good at it as he is. Hillary will now 'take a position' while he can say 'I already had one'. It is just political pandering just ignore it.

    This was an Islamic revenge attack from a wannabee ISIS guy. He was running around saying "Allah Akbar" as he gunned people down.

    Controlling the weapons does nothing. Unless we as a nation decide to change our second amendment and article 8 of the constitution. I do not see that happening any time soon. We have in many ways made guns to be the devil. Instead of teaching the respect and discipline as laid out in our constitution. Congress is once again failing at its job under section 8 of the constitution. Which goes hand in hand with #2 under the bill of rights.

    used to repel the recent wave of anti-transgendered hate
    When you act like an asshole expect to be treated as one. Tolerance is a 2 way street that some people want to be a one way street.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @09:20PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @09:20PM (#358865)

      > Congress is once again failing at its job under section 8 of the constitution.

      What? To enforce patents and copyrights? To issues letters of marque? To print money or collect taxes?

      > When you act like an asshole expect to be treated as one. Tolerance is a 2 way street that some people want to be a one way street.

      Yes, you must tolerate my hate for you!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @12:01AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @12:01AM (#358969)

      If 10% of those people who got gunned down had been armed the terrorist would have been killed just after he started shooting.

      The answer to crazies having guns is more sane people having guns, not less guns so that more will die by the next crazy shooter.

      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @01:33AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @01:33AM (#359029)

        Puerile, James Bond fantasy. If 10% of the club goers had been armed and drew their weapons and fired once the shooting started, many of them would have shot other armed club-goers or even unarmed bystanders. It's even possible that more people might have died. Not only that, but some of your gun-slinging heroes could have then been shot by S.W.A.T once they stormed the club. Hint: Real life doesn't play out the same way as the juvenile power-savior-revenge fantasies inside your own head do.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:04AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:04AM (#359123)
          You're right, there are never instances where a law-abiding citizen stops a mass murder. http://www.wnd.com/2015/03/man-with-concealed-carry-stops-slaughter/ [wnd.com] If anyone is living in a fantasy, it is you, sir.
        • (Score: 4, Insightful) by khallow on Monday June 13 2016, @04:09AM

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 13 2016, @04:09AM (#359132) Journal

          Puerile, James Bond fantasy. If 10% of the club goers had been armed and drew their weapons and fired once the shooting started, many of them would have shot other armed club-goers or even unarmed bystanders. It's even possible that more people might have died. Not only that, but some of your gun-slinging heroes could have then been shot by S.W.A.T once they stormed the club. Hint: Real life doesn't play out the same way as the juvenile power-savior-revenge fantasies inside your own head do.

          In the real world, the shooter would have chosen some other target that didn't have armed people present.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:22AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:22AM (#359144)

            > In the real world, the shooter would have chosen some other target that didn't have armed people present.

            Incorrect. [thetrace.org]

            It’s not the absence of guns, but rather the abundance of victims. If you’re going to do an act like this, you need a certain number of people in one space.

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday June 13 2016, @05:36PM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 13 2016, @05:36PM (#359468) Journal

              It’s not the absence of guns, but rather the abundance of victims. If you’re going to do an act like this, you need a certain number of people in one space.

              And I don't see evidence of that in the link you provide. It spend more time disproving its own assertions. For example,

              For example, out of six mall shootings included in the report, two occurred in malls with gun-free signs, and yet armed citizens attempted to intervene. In the Clackamas Town Center shooting in Oregon, a permit holder confronted the shooter (but did not fire) at the end of the rampage; in the Trolley Square Mall shooting in Salt Lake City, an off-duty police officer helped subdue the shooter. Both men were in explicit violation of gun-free policies — but their presence means that for the shooters’ purposes, those malls were not gun-free zones after all.

              Notice in the two cases (of six mentioned gun free zone incidents) where someone in a gun free zone attempted to intervene with a firearm, they stopped the shooting. Then there are two cherry picked situations which allege to show the futility of armed response (a person who gunned down two police officers and an armed civilian as well as the Rep. Gabrielle Giffords shootings where someone at the end almost shot the wrong person). So we're supposed to take seriously the cherry picked cases and ignore the other two situations which showed opposite outcomes.

              And of course, the two cherry picked scenarios show the shooters choosing relatively safe targets. A restaurant with no expectation that anyone armed was present or a Walmart (ditto on expectation of number of armed people) for the first shooting. In the second case, the armed person who almost accidentally shot the wrong person was also the first armed person to the scene. So we have the crazy people hitting soft targets just like they supposedly don't do.

              In other words, we have a number of examples that supposedly proved one thing while unintentionally disproving other things. You need evidence not some spectacular case of reasoning failure.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @06:44PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @06:44PM (#358754)

    I wonder if this attack could/will be used to repel the recent wave of anti-transgendered hate.

    Here are the latest tweets from the Donald

    Are you intending to imply (by putting these things so close together) anti-transgender hate from Trump? Based on what (I'm genuinely curious)? The only time I've seen him address a transgender issue was during the whole restroom hysteria, and his response to a question on it was that they should use whatever restroom they want to use.

    • (Score: 2) by butthurt on Sunday June 12 2016, @06:55PM

      by butthurt (6141) on Sunday June 12 2016, @06:55PM (#358762) Journal

      Later he said:

      "I believe it should be states' rights and I think the states should make the decision, they're more capable of making the decision." -- http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/279843-trump-leave-transgender-issue-to-states [thehill.com]

    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday June 12 2016, @07:08PM

      by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Sunday June 12 2016, @07:08PM (#358778) Journal

      Are you intending to imply (by putting these things so close together) anti-transgender hate from Trump?

      Nope. Is dumping some information with a few line breaks all it takes to outrage you?

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @08:15PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @08:15PM (#358818)

        Outrage? I don't know where you're getting that from.

        • (Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday June 12 2016, @10:20PM

          by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Sunday June 12 2016, @10:20PM (#358914) Journal

          Don't post questions like:

          Are you intending to imply (by putting these things so close together) anti-transgender hate from Trump?

          --
          [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
          • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @11:10PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @11:10PM (#358941)

            Why shouldn't I ask such questions? It was unclear to me what you were trying to say, so I asked what your intent was. That doesn't imply that I am outraged; it implies that I don't understand your writing. If your intent is unclear and I shouldn't ask for clarification, I should do what, make wild-assed assumptions about what you mean (like you appear to be doing about me)?

            You made a conjecture about the incident impacting transgender hate, then followed it by a tweet where Trump is expressing sympathy for the (transgender) victims. It's not crazy for someone to think that tweet was intended to support your conjecture. Many people write their posts with a logical flow, rather than treating each paragraph as being completely unrelated to the others, as you appear to do.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @01:10AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @01:10AM (#359011)

              Remedial reading classes are available at a community college near you.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by davester666 on Sunday June 12 2016, @07:11PM

    by davester666 (155) on Sunday June 12 2016, @07:11PM (#358781)

    If it's one guy, acting alone, killing some people, who will likely to be found to have never met another radical Islamic terrorist.

    Tim McVeigh would be a radical Christian terrorist then.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday June 12 2016, @08:53PM

      Was he? Or are you just assuming he was because he was white and lived in the US?

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 4, Informative) by sjames on Sunday June 12 2016, @09:11PM

        by sjames (2882) on Sunday June 12 2016, @09:11PM (#358849) Journal

        He called himself a Christian and he blew up people he said were doing wrong. The Orlando guy called himself a Muslim and shot up people he said were doing wrong.

        • (Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday June 12 2016, @09:21PM

          Citation needed. As far as I ever heard his relevant beliefs were strictly political. They were even ones I agree with, though I tend to disagree strongly on method of remedy.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 3, Interesting) by sjames on Sunday June 12 2016, @10:57PM

            by sjames (2882) on Sunday June 12 2016, @10:57PM (#358937) Journal

            Actually, he seemed to vacillate on that subject over time, so perhaps he is a poor example of a Christian terrorist (though he did take last rites before his execution).

            But that's kind of the point. We know Mateen identified as Muslim, but we have no evidence that he was devout, much less fundamentalist. According to reports, Mateen seemed more motivated by homophobia than Islam.

            Eric Rudolph would be a good example of a Christian terrorist.

            • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 13 2016, @01:40AM

              Ahh, see there's the difference. McVeigh did what he did for political ideology; no religion involved beyond him possibly having beliefs at all. Islamic terrorists do it because their religion demands it of them.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 2) by sjames on Monday June 13 2016, @03:25AM

                by sjames (2882) on Monday June 13 2016, @03:25AM (#359104) Journal

                You're begging the question. We don't know that the guy in Orlando IS an Islamic terrorist. If his being vaguely Muslim and killing a bunch of people makes him an Islamic terrorist, then McVeigh is indeed a Christian terrorist.

                • (Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 13 2016, @09:41AM

                  No, I'm going on reports of a man with an islamic name shouting "allahu akbar" and shooting a hundred people or so. If you're shouting about your god while you shoot people, it's safe for someone to assume you're religiously motivated.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                  • (Score: 3, Informative) by sjames on Monday June 13 2016, @04:01PM

                    by sjames (2882) on Monday June 13 2016, @04:01PM (#359402) Journal

                    The reports I've seen said the music was so loud, nobody even heard the guns, much less anything shouted or not.

              • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:35AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:35AM (#359156)

                > Islamic terrorists do it because their religion demands it of them.

                Nope. Their religious interpretation provides an excuse for them to act on their own prejudices.
                Islam no more demands it of them than Christianity demands it of christians ala leviticus 20:13 [biblehub.com]

                If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable.
                They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

                • (Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 13 2016, @09:32AM

                  Islam, as preached in many mosques, does in fact demand it and is precisely why this happens. Christianity, barring a few disavowed nutjobs, preaches only peace from the pulpit. Equating the two makes you look like a fool.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @11:28AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @11:28AM (#359298)

                    > Islam, as preached in many mosques, does in fact demand it

                    In your wet dreams.
                    Compared to the daily evangelical fixation on LGBQT, the topic barely comes up in most mosques.
                    I doubt you've ever even been in a mosque.

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday June 13 2016, @04:18AM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 13 2016, @04:18AM (#359139) Journal

              But that's kind of the point. We know Mateen identified as Muslim, but we have no evidence that he was devout, much less fundamentalist. According to reports, Mateen seemed more motivated by homophobia than Islam.

              Eric Rudolph would be a good example of a Christian terrorist.

              No, I don't grant that. I could see someone committing a violent act and faking a religious belief either as false flag or to throw authorities off their trail. So I grant that. But this guy went beyond just faking phone calls with a visit to the Middle East and some degree of contact with ISIS.

              • (Score: 2) by sjames on Monday June 13 2016, @04:39AM

                by sjames (2882) on Monday June 13 2016, @04:39AM (#359159) Journal

                Can you point to a source about the visit? I haven't seen that. I do see in updated information that he was once investigated by the FBI with no action taken for comments he was supposed to have made at work, then again for having had contact with a U.S. citizen who later became a suicide bomber but he was determined not to be a threat. That suggests to me that the 911 call might have held an element of sarcasm towards the FBI.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @05:31AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @05:31AM (#359174)

                  Seems to have gone on the hajj [washingtonpost.com] which is not particularly note-worthy since even half-assed muslims do it (kind of like cafeteria catholics) and its in saudi which is the land of fundamentalism but also where they are scared shitless of isis (was isis even a thing in 2012?)

                  > having had contact with a U.S. citizen who later became a suicide bomber

                  for al qaeda [theguardian.com] too, not even isis

                  reports from his ex-wife (whom he beat) are that he was just an asshole [cbslocal.com] and not particularly religious
                  co-worker confirms his long-standing asshole nature too [floridatoday.com]

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @11:08PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @11:08PM (#358939)

            Citation needed. As far as I ever heard his relevant beliefs were strictly political. They were even ones I agree with, though I tend to disagree strongly on method of remedy.

            I got your fucking citation right here. [wikipedia.org] As you already guessed, sjames is talking out of his ass, at least as far as Timothy McVeigh is concerned. On the provided wiki reference scroll down to the section labelled "Religious beliefs". Among other things it says McVeigh professed belief in "a God", although he said he had "sort of lost touch with" Catholicism and "I never really picked it up, however I do maintain core beliefs." And he stated that he did not believe in a hell and that science is his religion. In June 2001, a day before the execution, McVeigh wrote a letter to the Buffalo News identifying himself as agnostic. I would think that pretty well demolishes any notion that McVeigh was motivated by religion.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @12:10AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @12:10AM (#358974)

              "However, he took the Last Rites, administered by a priest, just before his execution," it says right after the bit about the letter saying he was agnostic. Odd that you omit that.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @12:30AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @12:30AM (#358987)

                "However, he took the Last Rites, administered by a priest, just before his execution," it says right after the bit about the letter saying he was agnostic. Odd that you omit that.

                It's Pascal's Fucking Wager at that point.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:26AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:26AM (#359149)

                  Pascal's Wager is so christian-centric that even mentioning it proves the point.
                  It only works if the choice is between no god and the catholic god.
                  Add in all the other versions of god and it becomes a game of roulette.

                  • (Score: 2) by DECbot on Monday June 13 2016, @11:18PM

                    by DECbot (832) on Monday June 13 2016, @11:18PM (#359661) Journal

                    If you had to choose between throwing your money in a trash can and throwing your money on a roulette table... no matter how you played your money on the roulette table you'd have better odds of a return than putting your money in the trash can.

                    --
                    cats~$ sudo chown -R us /home/base
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by frojack on Sunday June 12 2016, @08:53PM

    by frojack (1554) on Sunday June 12 2016, @08:53PM (#358834) Journal

    Gun control was also brought up very early in the reporting after the gunman was identified. They were lamenting how easy it was to get ahold of a gun.

    Yet this guy had all the permits for gun ownership and possession in Florida and two adjacent states.

    The shooter, Omar Saddiqui Mateen, is 29 and from Fort Pierce, about 120 miles southeast of Orlando, two law enforcement officials told CNN. He had been trained as a security guard, CNN has learned.

    He worked as a guard at a facility for juvenile delinquents (Security firm G4S) says his ex wife.

    So if anyone in the country was vetted for Gun Possession it was this guy. He followed all the laws. He had all the permits. He had all the background checks.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @11:12PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 12 2016, @11:12PM (#358944)

      So if anyone in the country was vetted for Gun Possession it was this guy. He followed all the laws. He had all the permits. He had all the background checks.

      But still are you gong to now claim that we don't need any more gun regulations? Everything I'm reading so far about this guy screams out that he was a tragedy just waiting to happen.

      • (Score: 5, Touché) by frojack on Monday June 13 2016, @12:53AM

        by frojack (1554) on Monday June 13 2016, @12:53AM (#359004) Journal

        Everything I'm reading so far about this guy screams out that he was a tragedy just waiting to happen.

        And all your regulations never saw it coming. And neither did all the NSA spying and trawling of social media. And neither did the phone taps, the email indexing, the FBI investigations. (Yes he was looked at twice by the FBI).

        But you, YOU spotted it right away, just reading a few late breaking news reports. YOU, all alone spotted this. You're too incompetent to sign into your favorite web site, but by gawd you can spot a terrorist at a hundred yards just looking at a couple CNN pages.

           

        --
        No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
        • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @02:30AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @02:30AM (#359077)

          Problem is...

          1. Nothing he had done prior was actually criminal and provable in court. The FBI would have needed to set up a sting operation, gently goad him into taking action with FBI-supplied fake weapons, and then arrest him. Getting him to take action in a controllable way, but without getting the case thrown out of court, is a delicate balancing act that takes time and doesn't always work.

          2. There are probably several million other people in this country who basically desire to commit a similar act, and the FBI probably knows about a million of them. There is no way that the FBI can trail, stalk, stake out, or otherwise follow every one of those people. This is a long-tail problem, and resources are limited.

          • (Score: 2) by frojack on Monday June 13 2016, @03:44AM

            by frojack (1554) on Monday June 13 2016, @03:44AM (#359114) Journal

            You are partly right, AC.

            But you missed the point where he passed a FBI background check while applying for a Security Clearance.
            They didn't need any probable cause to deny him that clearance, because he already accepted that background check in his job application.
            Anything worrisome that they found in the background check should have tripped alarms.

            This guy passed all the checks, probably it will be found he bought all his guns legally.

            Once again gun control does not work. And neither would banning gun altogether. Ask the Israelis. Stabbing reports are all the rage these days, and they are probably coming to a venue near you.

            I doubt there are "several million" that want to do the same thing. They may number in the thousands, (with idle dreams, and secret desires). Probably no more than a couple hundred with real intent and the courage to do something, who are just waiting for an "excuse". Those are the only ones I expect the FBI to watch.

            --
            No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:53AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @04:53AM (#359165)

              Probably no more than a couple hundred with real intent and the courage to do something, who are just waiting for an "excuse". Those are the only ones I expect the FBI to watch.

              If only they weren't indistinguishable from all the others who are just talking shit.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @07:35AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @07:35AM (#359228)

            Long tail problem?
            Then chop off the head. Ban islam and kick all people who follow islam to the middle east. WIRM.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @08:55AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 13 2016, @08:55AM (#359257)

              Head? Nuke Mecca, Jerusalem, the Vatican, Clearwater Florida, and Provo. That ought about cover it, all the centers of infection of Abrahamic Faiths, except for Pike Place Market, but one must think of the fish!

        • (Score: 2) by dak664 on Monday June 13 2016, @04:18PM

          by dak664 (2433) on Monday June 13 2016, @04:18PM (#359409)

          He was looked at twice and underwent surveillance. To me that suggests at least one attempted sting which he was too smart to fall for. And very probably those investigations and stings pissed him off.

          Wonder how much credit the FBI should get for causing this one?

      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday June 13 2016, @01:17AM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 13 2016, @01:17AM (#359013) Journal

        You miss the most obvious fact: GUN CONTROL DOESN'T WORK!! Never did, never will.

        • (Score: 2) by Nollij on Tuesday June 14 2016, @12:36AM

          by Nollij (4559) on Tuesday June 14 2016, @12:36AM (#359688)

          Never? Not even once? [reuters.com]

          • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday June 14 2016, @01:11AM

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 14 2016, @01:11AM (#359698) Journal

            What is the overall homicide rate, overall crime rate, overall violent crime rate in Oz? For all of Europe's bragging about gun control, Europe's overall rates aren't much better than in the US. Especially since the invasion of barbarians from south of the Med has begun. Who has noticed that rape is up all over Europe? Give the women some guns, so they can blow the testicles off of their rapists, and crime will drop.

            I do recall someone telling me about the "bikies" in Oz. They seem to have all the weapons they want. So, no, gun control doesn't work in Oz - guns were outlawed, so now only outlaws have guns.

            • (Score: 2) by Nollij on Tuesday June 14 2016, @03:51AM

              by Nollij (4559) on Tuesday June 14 2016, @03:51AM (#359740)

              Well, in the linked story, the overall homicide rate in 1996 (pre-gun control) was 311 - 98 of them by gun. In 2014, it was 238 - 35 by gun. But you aren't actually interested in statistics.
              There's a far more detailed analysis over at Snopes [aic.gov.au], but the TL;DR is

              The main point to be learned here is that determining the effect of changes in Australia's gun ownership laws and the government's firearm buy-back program on crime rates requires a complex long-term analysis and can't be discerned from the small, mixed grab bag of short-term statistics offered here. And no matter what the outcome of that analysis, the results aren't necessarily applicable to the USA, where laws regarding gun ownership are (and always have been) much different than those in Australia.

              Is that the support you were looking for?

              • (Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday June 14 2016, @01:55PM

                by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 14 2016, @01:55PM (#359892) Journal

                Salutes, for quoting what is probably the most important part of any analysis of "gun control".

                "The main point to be learned here is that determining the effect of changes in Australia's gun ownership laws and the government's firearm buy-back program on crime rates requires a complex long-term analysis and can't be discerned from the small, mixed grab bag of short-term statistics offered here"

                Feel free to browse my journal page. I have a number of articles and quotes cited - I guess it's a small number, but they are there.

                There are no rules to be learned from passing gun control laws. Europe has varied results, in different countries. Australia has some encouraging results with their gun control - but it isn't all one-sided in favor of gun control.

                The US? Our results are very DIScouraging. Those cities with the strictest gun control are the very cities with the highest crime rates, and the highest rates of gun crime. They are the most violent cities in America.

                The cities in Texas have very lenient gun control laws. That is, in Texas, anyone can have a gun, unless he has been judged incompetent, or a felon. Open carry, concealed carry, put it in your trunk, in your glove box, in your window - any way you want to carry, you can carry. Only two people in the entire state of Texas have been killed with guns this year. Two. Chicago, with a tenth of the population of Texas, sees two killed every day.

                We have witnessed cities repeal gun control, and crime initially rises for a few months - then plummets. Criminals are either killed off, or they learn that honest citizens shoot back, so they move on to greener pastures.

                we have witnessed cities pass gun control laws, and crime stays stable for awhile, then slowly rises.

                We have witnessed a lot of crazy stuff here in the states. Lawmen want to claim all the credit when crime rates fall - but as your own quote suggests, things aren't so simple. A city passes a gun control law, and crime falls, so they claim credit - but nationwide, crime rates have falled at similar rates.

                It ain't a simple thing to figure out, but overall, history suggests that you are safest in a community where EVERYONE has access to guns.

                Now, to be honest, I have looked at Australia's statistics. As I said - they are just about the most encouraging statistics in the world, for gun control.

                I've also looked at the UK's statistics. You should be aware that most of their statistics are lies and damned lies. Again, if you care to look, I have a couple journal entries regarding gun crime and violent crime statistics in the UK. UK cops just don't record a lot of crimes. They are actually under pressure to MAKE the statistics support their gun control laws. Violent crime in the UK seems to be lower than in Chicago - but it much higher than gun control fanatics claim.

                Once again - thank you for your honesty. There are NOT any good statistics that support either of our positions, partly because governments don't maintain the same statistics, and partly because some governments are dishonest about those statistics.

                I do believe that an armed society is a polite society.
                http://www.liberteesalabama.com/store/p4/%22An_armed_society_is_a_polite_society.%22_Heinlein_quote_T-shirt.html [liberteesalabama.com]

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday June 13 2016, @04:29AM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 13 2016, @04:29AM (#359151) Journal

        But still are you gong to now claim that we don't need any more gun regulations?

        Why did you even ask? Why do we need any more gun regulations anyway? There seems to be this retarded assumption that every time something bad happens, we need more regulations, like regulation is some sort of syrup that tastes better when you pour more on.

    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday June 13 2016, @01:17AM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 13 2016, @01:17AM (#359012) Journal

      Frojack - you seem to miss the fact that he was employed as a security guard. I caught that among the earlier news stories. Ahhhhh - "security guard at the courthouse in Port St. Lucie, Florida." A government approved, government employed security guard.

      The unwise progressives who would see guns banned for everyone except law enforcement would have authorized this scumbag to have weapons anyway.

      THE POLICE ARE JUST PEOPLE who suffer from all the mental illnesses, political agendas, petty hatreds, and foibles that all the rest of the population suffers from!

      Maybe the headline should be changed to "Goverment Employee with ISIS ties guns down over 100 gays".

      • (Score: 2) by frojack on Monday June 13 2016, @03:28AM

        by frojack (1554) on Monday June 13 2016, @03:28AM (#359106) Journal

        Frojack - you seem to miss the fact that he was employed as a security guard.

        Pretty sure I mentioned that in the VERY post to which you replied.
        His most recent employment was with a youth detention center, he worked for a private security company that has contracts in three states.

        --
        No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.