lets have no controls then...and go the Archie Bunker route.
Shooting in San Bernardino, California
- Thread starter Neutral
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Yes but France hasn´t had 1,052 mass shootings in the last 1,066 days. I mean, think about that figure. That´s appalling.
he cousin describes him as a bad man but not an extremist! feck off , that's bullshit.
Great insight, that can definitely be a factor, especially considering some of the more recent incidents.
CNN Breaking News@cnnbrk
Officials: Female #SanBernardino attacker pledged allegiance to ISIS' leader in a Facebook post during the attack.
CNN Breaking News@cnnbrk
More: #SanBernardino attacker's pro-ISIS Facebook post made on account with a different name, U.S. official says.
Officials: Female #SanBernardino attacker pledged allegiance to ISIS' leader in a Facebook post during the attack.
CNN Breaking News@cnnbrk
More: #SanBernardino attacker's pro-ISIS Facebook post made on account with a different name, U.S. official says.
On the one hand, I'm glad she and her husband are dead. On the other, they could have had some intelligence if they were actually connected with anyone. It seems like they were more inspired by ISIS than a part of it.
Yup on CNN - they are saying self radicalized. Not much you can do with that sort of thing.
Yeah, I doubt this was an authorised attack, so to speak. That makes it more worrying in some respects, that some extremists might not even have a traceable and observable trail of communication before carrying out an attack. Makes prevention that much harder.
Hey. At least this is not a gun control issue.
Restrict muslims from buying guns! I think even the NRA would get behind that.
Not like it hasn't happened before. The California legislature shit their pants and imposed restrictions on guns after this happened...
It's harder to prevent but also usually smaller in scope. Though someone like Timothy McVeigh did a whole lot with basically two people.
Not like it hasn't happened before. The California legislature shit their pants and imposed restrictions on guns after this happened...
The NRA whole heartedly supported the gun control act of . . . 1968. Just coincidence.
And according to California senator Barbra Boxer . . . “In California, since the 90s,” she said, “we have passed a number of important gun safety laws. And over that period of time, we’ve had a reduction in gun violence of 56 percent.”
Boxer then said that’s not enough and national laws are needed, concluding, “Sensible gun laws work, we’ve proven it in California, and we’re not gonna give up.”
It is worth noting that California’s gun death stats, given its gun laws, have been lower than a lot of other states’. And the study she cited above, conducted in 2013, did conclude that from 1993 to 2010, gun deaths in California dropped over 50 percent.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/dem-...aws-in-california-a-day-after-san-bernardino/
normally people who owned a gun bought more guns I did buy a lot of ammo because they keep saying Obama would add restrictions to any gun sale including ammo, then I realized the gun manufacturers must support Obama because they sold more guns on Obama's watch then on any other president
Anytime someone talks about violence in California if is not terrorism related they give Trump even more reason about the Mexican illegals.
Did they find out who bought the rifles yet?
and no weapons involved
normally people who owned a gun bought more guns I did buy a lot of ammo because they keep saying Obama would add restrictions to any gun sale including ammo, then I realized the gun manufacturers must support Obama because they sold more guns on Obama's watch then on any other president
good reply
we need Federal gun laws that are uniform. no loopholes. Hunters would be able to keep thier guns. Register them.
Just common sense stuff.
But it will be a long time before any reasonable laws are passed.
Just common sense stuff.
But it will be a long time before any reasonable laws are passed.
I wouldn't mind knowing if that 2013 study investigated whether that decline was due to legislation or the fact that Crips and Bloods stopped killing each other with such frequency.
the media in the apartment of the attackers...the authorities are going to be pissed off
They liked orange flavored popsicles - this is vital information for future profiling
They liked orange flavored popsicles - this is vital information for future profiling
Last edited:
It's all well and good throwing this up and leaving it without explaining what's included. Yes, they are still shootings. But it's odd that we managed to miss the news on 300 other mass shootings? Oh, it's because this also includes gang members killing 2 and injuring 2. Or a drug deal going bad with all 4 people shooting and injuring each other. Take those cases out, and it drops from 355 to 21. Still more than it should be, but hardly as shocking as these figures. so what did the news use for their source on this? Reddit.
What's your point?
Gang violence isn't violence?
I am also aware when statistics for gun violence are compiled in this country - suicide by gunshot is included in that. I made no comments on the issue...others may have. As to why the media didn't report the other cases? Ask the media.
Just because you have an agenda doesn't mean I have one.
this guy is 10x worse than the fecking nutter in colorado. this cnut of cnuts killed people who gave him and his rent a bride nutter of a wife a baby shower and gave them gifts. did them at a christmas party to boot. this religious nutter beats the other guy. crazy wife trumps crazy hair and eyes. .
using misleading information whose accuracy is in some cases suspect is bad methodology and should not be used as a jumping off point for a discussion about this issue. We can all I think agree that a gang shootout that kills one and injures 3 is not the same as the shooting in Charleston. Yet for the people who put together the information you linked, they're treated as the same.
What agenda do I have?
So some shootings we shouldn't be bothered about?
What's the difference? Unless you value lives of those in projects and rough neighbourhoods differently to those who are in the middle class and attend church services? They all add to the statistics. And they all show that America has a serious problem with firearms.
Not at all, and I don't think I said that? I said the statistics gathered were somewhat vague, and there's a difference between the types of information gathered. Why would I not bother with some shootings? Which are the ones I'm more likely to have to respond to? The ones you don't see plastered all over the media. I said for the discussion to have a proper starting point, we need have to better understand the different causes of the information gathered. Lumping absolutely everything together like it has been is great for fear mongering and showing a broad picture, but won't help much without delving deeper into those statistics represented.
The difference is the causes for drug/gang violence is different to someone going into a public place for the sole reason of killing or injuring people. Lumping everything together doesn't help with solving those.
Funny that both of you insinuate that I care less about one persons life than another.
Media trampling through a crime scene, what a joke.
Gotta be the first to break some kind of story. To hell with everything else.
You said the gang shootings should be removed from the stats as if they were somehow irrelevant?
As far as I'm concerned accidental gun deaths should be added in - any death that could be avoided by taking guns out of the equation should be involved in the general discussion.
That's for the gun control thread, though.
FBI confirm that they are investigating crime as "act of terrorism".
It seems the wife could have been the radicalizing force. Since Adam and Eve...
I said they should be explained and not grouped together, since the media doesn't care about about the gang shootings. That's padded in there with the Charleston shootings et al because it looks shocking and they can get their hits.
You really think they added in gang or drug shootings because they care about them? Or because it sensationalizes something they can report on? Flip it around, if the media didn't report on the 21 or so cases of mass shootings in public places, would you still be having this discussion? Don't remember anyone making a thread about needing to stop all the violence in any drug riddled, gang neighborhoods. (Happy to be proven wrong on that).
I agree this isn't the thread, and apologies if I started the derailing of it with my initial post. I do, however, take issue with the insinuation that I don't care about people's lives. If that was the case, I wouldn't do what I do.
I'm not familiar with the context, but to me it's just a calendar that counts the daily number of mass shootings in the US. There is nothing else to explain, it's just the counts of events where more than 4 people have been shot with firearms.
Last edited:
Well considering that's actually not what it's a count of...
My bad then.