Slash Boxes

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This discussion has been archived.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: 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. []

    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.