Random General Headlines

[allegro]

@Deepvoid , I guess the FBI brought this guy in for having talked to a well-known suicide bomber. Talked to. They questioned him and then tracked him for a year, and he didn't talk to that guy again. Then he talked to some other radical, so they brought him in. Note that the FBI knew this because they were tracking him. They questioned him, did research, could find no evidence of wrongdoing, so they let him go.

Right now, everybody in this country has civil rights and the FBI can't arrest or hold people for "suspicion" of nothing. And gun restrictions prevent felons and people with mental illness from getting guns, but we do not have a National gun registration database (because of states rights) and we do not yet have any laws that prevent any "suspicious people" on any "watch lists" from getting guns, mostly because our Federal Watch List is so fucked up, PILOTS are erroneously on it and also because people have not actually DONE anything.

If there is an Order of Protection issued against you, yes, that wil trigger a flag in Illinois that will prevent you from buying a gun or ammo in Illinois to use to kill your spouse. However, that does not prevent you from driving 30 minutes to Gary Indiana to buy a gun and ammo, there, where the OofP won't be in the database. Yes, our system is flawed and no, there is no way to know that this "suspect" was going to do THIS.

Even if we ban "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines right now, Federally (which we have done before, which I would fully support), we would not be capable of confiscating the millions that are already out there. A ban would be a start, though. These terrorists are going to be using these as the easy weapon of choice in this country. However, sadly, it is probably going to take something like the attempted assassination of somebody for change to happen (the attempted assassination of Reagan is what brought on the last one). I mean, nobody cares until it affects Congress otherwise Congress is too in bed with the NRA.

Ultimately, though, the illegal guns will come in the same way as the illegal drugs.

[Archive_Reports]

Actually, the worst bit I've seen is the erasure by the straight media in turning this into a 'oh, those terrible Muslims shooting innocent people' story, instead of portraying the truth that this is the biggest homophobic attack in decades. Sit the fuck down.

Change "Muslims" to "Islamic extremists" and it's really just both, isn't it?

[Deepvoid]

And gun restrictions prevent felons and people with mental illness from getting guns, but we do not have a National gun registration database (because of states rights) and we do not yet have any laws that prevent any "suspicious people" on any "watch lists" from getting guns, mostly because our Federal Watch List is so fucked up, PILOTS are erroneously on it and also because people have not actually DONE anything.

So what if a few people end up on this list by mistake and do not possess the ability to buy a gun?
If it can prevent a thousand "potential threat" from buy a gun, those "errors" become acceptable.

The 2nd amendment can be amended. It is not set in stone. Will it ever be amended? Of course not.
But I'm with @richardp . Nothing will get done. Another attack or mass shooting will happen. We'll talk about it for a few weeks. Say how horrible it is, then move on with our lives.
Once you repeat this process often enough, not only does it become your new reality but it becomes your new "normal". So you stop having sympathy and at one point, you just stop caring. You just hope it never happens to you.

Because let's face it, the last 4 pages of discussion are theoretically just us venting and rambling on the subject. In reality, it's absolutely meaningless.

[Frozen Beach]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/12/drag-queen-orlando-gunman-omar-mateen-was-my-friend.html

[Deepvoid]

Found one positive thing (sarcasm here) that has come out of this shooting. People are making money!

Stocks for Smith & Wesson as well as Sturm Ruger have surged following the shooting.

[allegro]

This is just so heartbreaking and scary:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...hooting-terror


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.2671082

[DigitalChaos]

So what if a few people end up on this list by mistake and do not possess the ability to buy a gun?
If it can prevent a thousand "potential threat" from buy a gun, those "errors" become acceptable.

Replace 2nd amendment with 1st amendment in this scenario. You can't deprive people of constitutional rights without due process. Further, that shit ALWAYS ends up abused down the line. Further still, if you allow one constitutional right to be infringed without due process, you open the door for all constitutional rights. This is a horrifically bad path to go down. Block people from publishing words if you deem them scary. Search peoples property without a warrant if the govt things you are maybe scary... yeah great idea.

The 2nd amendment can be amended. It is not set in stone. Will it ever be amended? Of course not.

There is a very explicit process for constitutional amendments. There has been quite a few of them over the short history of the country. Not one gun control proposal has involved an constitutional amendment.

Even if we ban "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines right now, Federally (which we have done before, which I would fully support), we would not be capable of confiscating the millions that are already out there. A ban would be a start, though. These terrorists are going to be using these as the easy weapon of choice in this country. However, sadly, it is probably going to take something like the attempted assassination of somebody for change to happen (the attempted assassination of Reagan is what brought on the last one). I mean, nobody cares until it affects Congress otherwise Congress is too in bed with the NRA.

Ultimately, though, the illegal guns will come in the same way as the illegal drugs.

Additionally, these are incredibly simple devices. Many are decades or even a century old. California has nearly outlawed the AR-15. They have outlawed high capacity magazines. They have the issues you describe and one more: people are now making HUGE numbers of these things. A magazine is a box with a spring in it. An AR-15 seems complex to many, but Californians are making tens, if not hundreds, of THOUSANDS of them from scratch. This number will only grow, especially as more restrictions are added and the ease of production expands. You may as well try and stop the proliferation of sharp objects or anything that can create fire.




How in the fuck has this gone back to "guns are bad" instead of looking at ISIS and homophobia?

[allegro]

I think people are looking at all of the above, actually.

[DigitalChaos]

In that case, I think it's worth looking at this short video again. It couldn't be more topical. These poor people were trapped in there for 3 hours before police could deal with it.

[allegro]

Because the guy was on the phone with the authorities saying he was holding hostages and that he had a bomb (he didn't). And going into a dance club lugging a self-defense AR15 all night sure can't be any fun.

[Dra508]

How in the fuck has this gone back to "guns are bad" instead of looking at ISIS and homophobia?

I think people feel like guns and gun bans is the lowest common denominator of control. Seems like hate is harder to fix. Which it should not be, but there here we are.

[DigitalChaos]

Because the guy was on the phone with the authorities saying he was holding hostages and that he had a bomb (he didn't). And going into a dance club lugging a self-defense AR15 all night sure can't be any fun.

its outright banned due to alcohol (so is driving, but somehow we figure that out), but concealing a very small handgun is pretty trivial. They can be incredibly small and still an effective source of lethal force.

[implanted_microchip]

The argument isn't "guns are bad." The argument is "we can do more to keep guns from being in the hands of those who would use them to do bad things." Whether that's proven effective or not, we really don't know, and we really haven't tried much. It'd be more than what we have done, which is a whole nothing whatsoever.

This very American cowboy Dirty Harry idea that, oh, if victims just had guns we'd all be safer since we'd have bullets flying in all directions and cops would have less of a sense of who the shooter is and might end up taking down someone just trying to defend themselves is just ridiculous to me. There is such a low bar of necessary training and firearms handling to be able to acquire a gun. I could very easily go get a gun within the week without having ever held one, let alone fired one, and be carrying not long after, despite zero experience with it. I would be the worst person to have wielding a weapon in a shooting environment. I wouldn't have any sense of how to use the thing beyond the typical "hold, point and shoot" and would likely risk drawing attention to myself and anyone around me, and could very easily have stray rounds hit innocent people I'm supposedly trying to protect.

If this idea -- this "everyone is the Lone Ranger" bullshit is supposed to work -- then to make it viable you'd need to, my god, increase regulations and restrictions on who could buy firearms! Oh no, right? You'd need to require far more classes, far more training, far more weapons handling courses, far more teaching of responsibility and then next thing you know a ton of people are shut out of ever getting a gun because they can't afford all of those things either time-wise, financially or some combination of the two. You'd result in those who own guns being far safer because of it, but you'd also result in less people having access to them. So obviously that's something the conservative/libertarian crowd just can't seem to stomach.

Either you keep letting every random idiot get a gun and let more bad things happen or you increase the rules and regulations and suddenly you just have a ton of this country whining that not everybody can get their hands on a semi-auto with extended mags and AR-15s for "self-defense."

And even then you're already relying on an Amendment written when the most sophisticated weaponry took a minute if you were skilled to load a single round and citizens could in theory combat the military if need be. The thought of a bunch of "muh gun rightz" idiots strolling around with assault rifles and pistols trying to stand against drones is just hilarious and part of me would love to see it if it wouldn't be so sad. No one's saying "let's get rid of all your guns," people are saying "let's make sure those who get them are getting them lawfully and are not a danger to others."

But see accepting that doesn't allow for the ridiculous "us v. them" narrative everyone in this country clings to and might result in something actually changing, so, you know, don't expect that to happen any time soon.

[DigitalChaos]

Whether that's proven effective or not, we really don't know, and we really haven't tried much.

... Have you hear of California? Everything in the rest of your post about ease of access is something CA tries to address as well. You aren't going to top CA's gun control at a national level. So you have a great example of how effective it is.

Either you keep letting every random idiot get a gun and let more bad things happen or you increase the rules and regulations and suddenly you just have a ton of this country whining that not everybody can get their hands on a semi-auto with extended mags and AR-15s for "self-defense."

Again, California. CA has already seen shooters who have made their own guns. You really need to start focusing on the WHY and not the HOW if you want to fix things. Because if there is anything that is proven, its that many years of effort has been focused into guns in many different ways and its clearly not having an impact for a number of reasons. Try a new route. You have plenty of options to look at right now.

[implanted_microchip]

State-level legislation is a piss poor example because nothing's stopping people from driving over from state to state where laws aren't as restrictive. The guy stopped who was heading to the LA Pride Parade the other day did just that. There are reasons certain things happen at a federal level.

And no one is saying "enact these policies and all gun violence will end." People are saying "we can cut down on a lot of it." Most of these mass shooters acquire their firearms legally and I truly believe that a lot less people would be getting killed if it was tougher for mentally unstable and imbalanced hateful people to get access to high-capacity weaponry. There will always be violence because it's in human nature but that doesn't mean we say "fuck it" and let everybody kill each other, we have laws in place in attempts to curb violence.

Everyone acts like this is black or white and it's fucking stupid. Everyone's in their set little corner saying "no it has to be this" and "no it has to be that" when really everybody needs to realize it's more than one thing. Gun control, discouraging hateful ideology, trying to discourage violence as a solution to problems, taking away the fame surrounding being a criminal, all of these things in tandem could help lower the amount of deaths we see from these kinds of things and yet everyone in the Libertarian camp and everyone in the Conservative camp seems dug-the-fuck-in in this belief that it can ONLY be one thing and nobody on the Left has enough of a spine to actually talk about things with some action and intensity. It's numbing and infuriating and it's this bullshit back and forth need to discredit one another that is why nothing, ever, at all, is done.

[DigitalChaos]

I'm just telling you to stop the failed decades long fixation on guns and try something else. Nobody seems to have anything else, probably because they are wasting so much time on Sisyphean tasks. Trump offers more options here than the majority on the left. That's sad.

[icklekitty]

The only reason this was a notable incident was that it was homophobic. Otherwise the rest of the world would have just gone "oh look, another day, another incident where America is mourning without doing the fucking obvious thing that stops this happening anywhere else". I hope the "if only they had guns" Bataclan critics will stfu now.

Lookong at at the profile of the killer the first thing that came into my head was "typical American bro". This guy had as much in common with Brock Rapeface as Daesh.

[DigitalChaos]

Because the allegiance to ISIS and ISIS taking credit is totally a normal thing in the US if it weren't for homophobia! /s

Why will this stop the "if only they had guns" people? This happened in another gun free zone.

[Deepvoid]

I'm just telling you to stop the failed decades long fixation on guns and try something else. Nobody seems to have anything else, probably because they are wasting so much time on Sisyphean tasks. Trump offers more options here than the majority on the left. That's sad.

What? Banning Muslims?

[icklekitty]

Because the allegiance to ISIS and ISIS taking credit is totally a normal thing in the US if it weren't for homophobia! /s

Why will this stop the "if only they had guns" people? This happened in another gun free zone.

that was a premeditated and coordinated attack. This was some insecure cunt being offended by two people kissing and losing his shit.

[sick among the pure]

As a member of the LGBT community I would like the focus to be placed squarely on the anti-LGBT narrative that is perpetrated daily in the US. We are a group who is often vilified. Can we please stop shifting attention for five seconds away from the fact that this is a regular reality for us, no matter on what scale the attack takes place?

[DigitalChaos]

What? Banning Muslims?

Yup, and that's why it's sad. The left can't even provide something better. Pretty low bar.

[DigitalChaos]

As a member of the LGBT community I would like the focus to be placed squarely on the anti-LGBT narrative that is perpetrated daily in the US. We are a group who is often vilified. Can we please stop shifting attention for five seconds away from the fact that this is a regular reality for us, no matter on what scale the attack takes place?

I'm 100% with you. A lot of the straight people want to downplay it and/or focus on other aspects though. It's nuts.

People really don't understand what kind of threats gays and other minorities have to face on a daily basis.

[DigitalChaos]

Gawker is reporting that the guy had been attending the club for years and had a profile on a gay dating app.
http://gawker.com/orlando-shooter-wa...awker_facebook

[ziltoid]

http://www.news.com.au/world/family-...6d3320fcaacb3e

[DigitalChaos]

@sick among the pure - you need to see this video if you havent
Are We Witnessing 'Straightsplaining' of the Orlando Massacre?

[DigitalChaos]

Pink Pistols put out an interesting statement on Orlando here: http://www.pinkpistols.org/2016/06/1...-orlando-club/

Gwendolyn Patton, First Speaker of the Pink Pistols, an international GLBT self-defense organization, warns people not to jump immediately to the assailant’s guns as the object of blame ... "At such a time of tragedy, let us not reach for the low-hanging fruit of blaming the killer’s guns. Let us stay focused on the fact that someone hated gay people so much they were ready to kill or injure so many."

Patton’s concerns are that knee-jerk gun-control efforts may make preventing future events harder rather than easier, as only the law-abiding potential victims will be affected by such laws. “It is difficult, if not impossible, to foresee such an event,” continues Patton, “But if they cannot be prevented, then they must be stopped as fast as someone tries to start them.”

[allegro]

As a member of the LGBT community I would like the focus to be placed squarely on the anti-LGBT narrative that is perpetrated daily in the US. We are a group who is often vilified. Can we please stop shifting attention for five seconds away from the fact that this is a regular reality for us, no matter on what scale the attack takes place?

But it seems like we can't discount the connection to stuff like this. Or this. Or this.

CEP then notes that, “Human rights observers estimated in December 2015 that ISIS had executed at least 36 suspected gay men within its territory. In a single day in September 2015, ISIS reportedly executed 10 suspected gay men, including a 15-year-old boy. ISIS-appointed courts have declared homosexuality a capital offense and ordered brutal punishments in line with an extremist reading of sharia (Islamic law). One of the most common punishments has been to throw individuals off buildings. Those who survive the fall are then stoned to death by waiting crowds, which also include children.”

Or what ISIS is doing to women. Like this. Or this. Or this.

Women and gays are treated worse than cattle.

This guy was talking to known terrorists, was being tracked by the FBI, and told the FBI, while holding hostages inside the Pulse nightclub, that he pledged alliance to ISIS. He may not have been on an ISIS mission, but he was obviously influenced by their anti-gay propaganda.

Sure, these conservative politicians are jumping onto a pulpit quick to point fingers at Islam. But, one battle at a time. If Ted Cruz is defending the LGBT crowd now, it can only serve to help the LGBT cause, later, when we remind him over and over and over again ... "HEY, remember when you ..."

[botley]

Patton’s concerns are that knee-jerk gun-control efforts may make preventing future events harder rather than easier, as only the law-abiding potential victims will be affected by such laws. “It is difficult, if not impossible, to foresee such an event,” continues Patton, “But if they cannot be prevented, then they must be stopped as fast as someone tries to start them.”

That is utter fucking nonsense. What do you think can be stopped faster, a dude running around with a military-style automatic assault rifle or a dude with a bolt-action manual hunting rifle with a magazine he has to reload every ten rounds? What do you think is easier to get in a society that bans the former but allows the latter under sensible legislative control? And if an assailant did use the latter to attack, what would happen? Spoiler alert: they are stopped. Quickly. We know this to be true.

[allegro]

People really don't understand what kind of threats gays and other minorities have to face on a daily basis.

Or us women.