|
Please attempt to distinguish between extremists and non extremists to avoid starting the inevitable waste of time that is "can Islam be judged by its believers?" - KwarK |
On May 23 2013 12:47 stroggozz wrote:
if you guys want to talk religion, the British media is basically a state religion. It doesn't have a god but it does have a huge bias, which leads to irrational beliefs and immoral actions. It is the decider of political and social ideology for most of the population.
Most interesting post I've read in this thread so far.
|
On May 23 2013 08:05 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 08:03 PVJ wrote:
Just saw this on v too.
wtf.
London really must be a tenser city to live at, than I've remembered it from holidays. Far, far safer from terrorism now than it was during the troubles.
On May 23 2013 08:13 Larkin wrote:
I wouldn't judge all of London based on this. It's an enormous city and the northern parts of it in particular are more common for Islamic extremism. I live in South London and it's totally safe. There are just areas you need to be careful in, as in any city.
I wasn't judging the city only by this, and I wasn't saying it is in danger of terrorism. I meant what I said, that it (seems to be a) tenser place to live in.
It's more and more dense, it has the biggest number of CCTVs in the world and it's not like crime rates are dropping because of it, everything else (like areas accessible by car) is heavily regulated and there's a growing gap in income, demographics, ect between certain parts of the city.
It just seems to me, and I also know it's pretty off topic from this case, that London is dealing with it's issues badly. Or dealing with them in ways that are leading down a questionable road.
I was there only two times for a week so I'm just saying this based on what I hear on the internet.
|
On May 23 2013 15:20 TheToaster wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 15:04 Uni1987 wrote:On May 23 2013 14:48 TheToaster wrote:
I can't even understand the pedestrian witnesses at all. They clearly see the dead guy and the murderer walking about, so they just keep standing on the sidewalk like a flock of sheep, staring at both the murderer(s) and the body? Wouldn't they either want to call and go get help, run away, or even try to beat up the murderer? Instead they stand around like a flock of sheep.
I'm talking about before the police arrived, during the OP's Youtube video. From watching another interview online, apparently the murderers were even telling witnesses to call the police. What the fuck, did they honestly need to be told to call the police? Yes, let's attack two men that just chopped of a man his head on the streets. The first reason why they do not attack is probably typical group behavior where everybody is expecting someone else to help. Secondly, yeah, let's attack two men covered in blood that just beheaded a man on the streets, armed with a knife and hatchet I guess gun control in the UK would make it very difficult for a pedestrian to do anything in that situation. But that doesn't explain why they would stick around and remain to be the potential next victim. Also, out of curiosity I looked up UK laws on other types of non-lethal weapons like stun guns, night sticks, etc. All are apparently illegal to possess, so I guess you're right. Makes me glad I live in the U.S. where I at least have some sort of self defense at my disposal.
The US is pretty big. Aren't the laws in different states and different counties similar to what you've now seen about London? You can only carry your guns if you got a very special license or something. Wasn't there something about LA being a "no gun city" for example?
That would be exactly the same arrangement as in Europe. People here can own guns if they want. The differences in practice aren't large.
|
I found this to be even more unbelievable as it is a from of attack so different from most we've seen in the western world so far. I would recommend everyone to not go watch this video, as this is exactly what those terrorists want you to do. I think you should do so out of respect for the killed person, evn more so as you would just make the murderers even more successful.
Also about the people just standing around: I was witnessing/involved in several car crashes/accidents, and most of the time I was in a state of shock for much longer than I could ever have expected; up to several minues. I guess (without having seen the video), this could have easily happened to persons here too.
On May 23 2013 16:15 TheToaster wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 16:12 Psychobabas wrote:
And off they go to prison for the rest of their lives (maybe out in a couple of decades?) to be pampered with flat screen televisions, 3 meals a day, billiard, football and prayer rooms.
All of which you pay for with taxes. No wonder European tax rates are so high.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_debate_in_the_United_States#Cost
You're welcome.
|
On May 23 2013 15:48 ThaSlayer wrote:
I can't comprehend why would the British government and the media would jump at labeling this a "terror attack"
Because terror is 4. violence or threats of violence used for intimidation or coercion; terrorism. I think the violence part checks out fairly well, there is also the threats of violence when they claim this will keep happening, unless (here comes the coercion) the UK ceases to do violence in Muslim countries. Only the death toll leaves this event short of a textbook terror attack.
|
Wait what? Terror attack?
Give me a break...
So overblown. Hate when they use that term just to get some good headlines.
|
On May 23 2013 16:37 Ropid wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 15:20 TheToaster wrote:On May 23 2013 15:04 Uni1987 wrote:On May 23 2013 14:48 TheToaster wrote:
I can't even understand the pedestrian witnesses at all. They clearly see the dead guy and the murderer walking about, so they just keep standing on the sidewalk like a flock of sheep, staring at both the murderer(s) and the body? Wouldn't they either want to call and go get help, run away, or even try to beat up the murderer? Instead they stand around like a flock of sheep.
I'm talking about before the police arrived, during the OP's Youtube video. From watching another interview online, apparently the murderers were even telling witnesses to call the police. What the fuck, did they honestly need to be told to call the police? Yes, let's attack two men that just chopped of a man his head on the streets. The first reason why they do not attack is probably typical group behavior where everybody is expecting someone else to help. Secondly, yeah, let's attack two men covered in blood that just beheaded a man on the streets, armed with a knife and hatchet I guess gun control in the UK would make it very difficult for a pedestrian to do anything in that situation. But that doesn't explain why they would stick around and remain to be the potential next victim. Also, out of curiosity I looked up UK laws on other types of non-lethal weapons like stun guns, night sticks, etc. All are apparently illegal to possess, so I guess you're right. Makes me glad I live in the U.S. where I at least have some sort of self defense at my disposal. The US is pretty big. Aren't the laws in different states and different counties similar to what you've now seen about London? You can only carry your guns if you got a very special license or something. Wasn't there something about LA being a "no gun city" for example? That would be exactly the same arrangement as in Europe. People here can own guns if they want. The differences in practice aren't large.
There's a huge difference in U.S. policy on concealed weapons:
- Stun guns are only illegal to carry in 5 states.
- Tasers/night sticks/knives and most handheld weapons are completely legal, as they are considered for self defense.
- Firearms can be concealed and carried with a permit. The permits are extremely easy to get in almost any state.
- Firearms can be bought almost anywhere, after waiting a few days to have your criminal history checked.
Based on what I've read, the U.K. strictly bans almost all of these. I'm not sure about owning a gun and keeping it in your house, but carrying one concealed on the streets is completely illegal for anyone.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51489 Posts
Few Updates on Last Evenings AttackNo change in domestic terror alert level since yesterday remains at 'substantial' Mayor Boris Johnson says neither Islam Nor UK foreign policy to blame for Woolwich killing Prime Minister David Cameron will chair a COBRA meeting, the Government's emergency response committee Woman Confronts Attackers+ Show Spoiler [Story] +
A mother-of-two, who confronted one of the two suspected Woolwich killers, said he told her they wanted "to start a war in London tonight."
Ingrid Loyau-Kennett, a mother-of-two and cub scout leader with training in first aid confronted the men, telling the pair to hand over their weapons and warning them: "You are going to lose."
She said she first saw the victim lying on the street. "When I saw this guy on the floor I thought it was an accident - then I saw the guy was dead and I could not feel any pulse.
"And then when I went up there was this black guy with a revolver and a kitchen knife, he had what looked like butcher's tools and he had a little axe, to cut the bones, and two large knives, and he said 'Move off the body'.
"So I thought 'OK, I don't know what is going on here' and he was covered with blood."
The 48-year-old, from Helston, Cornwall, told The Daily Telegraph: "I thought I had better start talking to him before he starts attacking somebody else. I thought these people usually have a message so I said 'What do you want?'
"I asked him if he did it and he said 'Yes', and I said 'Why?' and he said because he has killed Muslim people in Muslim countries, he said he was a British solider and I said 'Really?'.
"I said 'Right now it is only you versus many people, you are going to lose, what would you like to do?'
"And he said 'I would like to stay and fight'."
Her confrontation emerged as other witnesses revealed details of the horrific machete attack.
Julia Wilders, who lives near the scene, said: "We were driving back and my husband said to me 'Don't look, they're resuscitating someone'. But apparently they were stabbing him."
She said she later saw one of the attackers run towards police clutching two meat cleavers.
"He ran towards police before they could even get out of the car, and it looked like the other one was going to lift the gun up," the 51-year-old said.
Others took to Twitter to describe the events, with one user, writing on the account @Boyadee, describing a female officer "taking out" one of the men "like Robocop".
Joe Tallant, 20, saw one man holding a gun and a knife, and another holding two knives. He described how he saw the victim on the floor and the men asking onlookers to call the police.
He said: "I looked on the floor and I saw a dead body and then I saw one of the men walking around the body."
When the officers arrived, Mr Tallant said the attackers "walked towards the police car with their weapons and a police lady jumped out and shot them both".
English Defence League supporters took to the streets of Woolwich and threw missiles at police after the suspected terrorist killing earlier in the day. Elsewhere, two men were arrested following separate attacks on mosques. + Show Spoiler [The Rest Of The Story] +
In Woolwich, a group of between 75 and 100 men gathered at The Queen's Arms pub on Burrage Grove, where they sang nationalist songs.
Sky News correspondent Alistair Bunkall, said: "A few missiles have been thrown, glass bottles and the like. The police have been trying to surround them and charging them as well with batons."
Earlier, two men were arrested following separate attacks on mosques in the hours following the suspected terrorist incident in southeast London.
A 43-year-old man is in custody on suspicion of attempted arson after reportedly walking into a mosque with a knife in Braintree, Essex.
Local MP Brooks Newmark tweeted: "Local mosque in Braintree attacked by man with knives and incendiary device. Man arrested. No one injured."
He added: "Just met with leaders of local mosque in Braintree which was attacked this evening. Thanked local police for their swift response."
Essex Police confirmed a 43-year-old from Braintree had been arrested on suspicion of possession of an offensive weapon and attempted arson after the incident in Silks Way at 7.15pm.
The secretary of the mosque, Sikander Saleemy, said: "The police said it's too early to try and link it to what happened in Woolwich, but those of us who were here feel that it was some sort of revenge attack. It was clear from the man's behaviour.
"We absolutely condemn what happened in Woolwich, but it had nothing to do with us.
"It was an appalling act of terror - but it wasn't "Islamic" in any way. I wish it wasn't described like that, because sadly people will now start to blame Muslims."
A police spokesman said they were investigating the "full circumstances" and said "it would not be appropriate to speculate at this time".
In Kent, police were called to reports of criminal damage at a mosque in Canterbury Street, Gillingham, at 8.40pm.
A spokesman said a man was in custody on suspicion of racially-aggravated criminal damage.
|
On May 23 2013 06:18 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 06:01 Stol wrote:On May 23 2013 05:45 Doctorbeat wrote:On May 23 2013 05:40 edlover420 wrote:On May 23 2013 05:24 ImperialFist wrote:
Can Islam be judged by its believers?
Absolutely not, this is utter nonsense.
These killers can easily find verses in the Qoran which would support actions like this. People are not inherently evil but Islam is.
User was temp banned for this post. Actually by the most accepted interpretation of Qur'an it is actually stated that Allah will never forgive you if you kill another man and jihad is interpreted as a battle with yourself and your bad side to become better as a person. Yet some demagogues explain the words in Qur'an differently to naive uneducated people of the 3rd world countries, mainly not because they would believe so but because of their own economical interests and they train young man to become extremists and do crazy shit like this. What happened was indeed extremely shameful and all extremists are a disgrace for our religion. Hadith is a bitch. Though the religion is still partly to blame, when you have claims of it being the literal word of God. And many of the extremists are not 3rd world people but young muslims who grow up in Western nations and radicalize. Religion is never to blame, you are always accountable for your own actions and even in religious texts I have at least personally never heard of someone saying: "Do whatever you want, God doesnt care". If you, as an individual, are to put the blame on God for your actions you would actually have to know that its what God wants. With religion being a matter of belief this is in itself a contradiction. People who assume they know what God wants are to blame. People who use religion as a tool to get others to do their bidding are to blame. People who use religion as an excuse to harm others are to blame. Religion is a belief and even God, should there be one, would hold you responsible for your own actions. You can only try to do what you think is right in the name of God and you alone are to blame for your actions. That's not true. People make up "what God wants" or they listen to their peers for it. No one actually knows, but that doesn't stop the fact that it's this belief pushing them to take actions. I agree, you are the only one accountable for your actions, but that doesn't mean these people don't believe they really are one with God, and that God isn't telling them to do things. I think you put too much stock in a person who believes their morals are decided by a God who they know through texts, preachers, or their own subconscious. To really understand this phenomenon you have to accept that people will believe in illusions and lies even if you think they're ridiculous.
I dont really know what to answer to this, you're basically repeating exactly what I said but for some reason you also start out by saying "That's not true".
|
On May 23 2013 14:12 B.I.G. wrote:
When I hear about this kind of crap I'm afraid we're creating a world where our children will truly hate Islam and all who follow it. I'm 25 now and I can't even recall the last time I heard Islam being associated with anything positive... it's always killings or something that is painted as bad by the media or certain politicians. Sometimes I catch myself hating all this Islam stuff even while I've been raised to be very open minded and even have Muslim family and friends. I can only imagine what it does to the kids...
The catholic church has it's constant share of drama. Somehow people don't go apeshit when there is another skandal involving priests and children.
If anything kids will grow up with a clear distinction between god, the idea of religion and the organisations of religion. They are so massively apart from each other these days that it's a lot easier today to draw a line between god and human. And as it unsurprisingly turns out god is quite on the far side of religious actions and always has been.
|
|
|
On May 23 2013 16:08 TheToaster wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 15:44 hzflank wrote:On May 23 2013 15:20 TheToaster wrote:On May 23 2013 15:04 Uni1987 wrote:On May 23 2013 14:48 TheToaster wrote:
I can't even understand the pedestrian witnesses at all. They clearly see the dead guy and the murderer walking about, so they just keep standing on the sidewalk like a flock of sheep, staring at both the murderer(s) and the body? Wouldn't they either want to call and go get help, run away, or even try to beat up the murderer? Instead they stand around like a flock of sheep.
I'm talking about before the police arrived, during the OP's Youtube video. From watching another interview online, apparently the murderers were even telling witnesses to call the police. What the fuck, did they honestly need to be told to call the police? Yes, let's attack two men that just chopped of a man his head on the streets. The first reason why they do not attack is probably typical group behavior where everybody is expecting someone else to help. Secondly, yeah, let's attack two men covered in blood that just beheaded a man on the streets, armed with a knife and hatchet I guess gun control in the UK would make it very difficult for a pedestrian to do anything in that situation. But that doesn't explain why they would stick around and remain to be the potential next victim. Also, out of curiosity I looked up UK laws on other types of non-lethal weapons like stun guns, night sticks, etc. All are apparently illegal to possess, so I guess you're right. Makes me glad I live in the U.S. where I at least have some sort of self defense at my disposal. The way we see it: one guy died and people having guns would not of prevented that death. What gun control did was stop a second person from dying. As for the sheep thing: it's London. Half the people would of been oblivious to the incident. Of those who noticed, several would of called the police. There is no point in every single person calling the police as they only need to be called once. Why run away from a guy with a gun? By staying calm there was less chance of them being attacked. That's assuming that the murderers didn't decide to kill someone else who was watching. Maybe they decide to get mad at one of the pedestrians trying to help the victim. It was reported they were only allowing women to come near the victim, threatening any other men who tried to help. There could have easily been another incident before the police arrived. The point being that I'd rather not trust someone who just committed murder and started preaching like a madman. Anything could have happened before the police arrived, especially since the murderers probably knew they were the only ones around with lethal weapons. "Why run away from a guy with a gun?". Besides the fact that's just a blatantly stupid question in itself, there were plenty of reasons to run away in that situation. Edit: Now that I think about it, the comparison to sheep was my mistake. At least sheep know how to escape from a deadly threat. Comparing them to the pedestrians would be an insult to sheep.
It's not assuming anything. It happened and we know the outcome. One person died and the two attackers were injured. This is fact, not assumption.
There were plenty of reasons to calmly distance yourself from the attackers, not to run away.
People who have different views to you are not sheep or anything else, just because you cannot understand their views. The problem is your narrow-mindedness and not with other people. There is another thread for gun control yet you deliberately began the argument in this one because you look for any excuse to twist facts to fit your existing beliefs.
|
On May 23 2013 16:15 TheToaster wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 16:12 Psychobabas wrote:
And off they go to prison for the rest of their lives (maybe out in a couple of decades?) to be pampered with flat screen televisions, 3 meals a day, billiard, football and prayer rooms.
All of which you pay for with taxes. No wonder European tax rates are so high.
lol. USA has much bigger % of its citizens in prison.
|
Could we please treat them first as "complete nutcases" instead of "religiously motivated people who went nuts"? =/
Besides that the idea of a "well if people had guns they could defend themselves"-debate in here doesn't help because it's true for both sides.
|
On May 23 2013 16:42 Darkwhite wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 15:48 ThaSlayer wrote:
I can't comprehend why would the British government and the media would jump at labeling this a "terror attack"
Because terror is 4. violence or threats of violence used for intimidation or coercion; terrorism. I think the violence part checks out fairly well, there is also the threats of violence when they claim this will keep happening, unless (here comes the coercion) the UK ceases to do violence in Muslim countries. Only the death toll leaves this event short of a textbook terror attack.
But that definition can be applied to any violent act surely.
When I heard the news I thought of this story:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21522876
I'm not convinced that this isn't a random act of violence perpetrated by two acute paranoid schizophrenics giving whatever deluded reasoning behind their actions. My minds not made up, but there are aspects of this attack that don't yet add up to terrorism.
|
On May 23 2013 17:50 Deleuze wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 16:42 Darkwhite wrote:On May 23 2013 15:48 ThaSlayer wrote:
I can't comprehend why would the British government and the media would jump at labeling this a "terror attack"
Because terror is 4. violence or threats of violence used for intimidation or coercion; terrorism. I think the violence part checks out fairly well, there is also the threats of violence when they claim this will keep happening, unless (here comes the coercion) the UK ceases to do violence in Muslim countries. Only the death toll leaves this event short of a textbook terror attack. But that definition can be applied to any violent act surely.
For most violent acts, the actual violence is purposeful, such as when a burglar knocks the resident unconscious or when a woman shoots a guy trying to break into her car and so on and so forth. Terror is reserved for when the actual violence is essentially inconsequential, except for the intimidation it produces. Violence against an immediate threat is called self-defence, violence to steal someone's watch is called robbery, and so on.
The definition is obviously not perfect - language does not allow that. I still thought it was a reasonable starting point for comprehending how the media could label this an act of terror.
|
Some people on this thread actually trying to defend these animals by saying stuff like "oh well they were just crazy", "this shouldn't be classified as a terrorist attack", "this wasn't religiously motivated". It's sickening, even more so if you're British.
|
On May 23 2013 17:36 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 16:08 TheToaster wrote:On May 23 2013 15:44 hzflank wrote:On May 23 2013 15:20 TheToaster wrote:On May 23 2013 15:04 Uni1987 wrote:On May 23 2013 14:48 TheToaster wrote:
I can't even understand the pedestrian witnesses at all. They clearly see the dead guy and the murderer walking about, so they just keep standing on the sidewalk like a flock of sheep, staring at both the murderer(s) and the body? Wouldn't they either want to call and go get help, run away, or even try to beat up the murderer? Instead they stand around like a flock of sheep.
I'm talking about before the police arrived, during the OP's Youtube video. From watching another interview online, apparently the murderers were even telling witnesses to call the police. What the fuck, did they honestly need to be told to call the police? Yes, let's attack two men that just chopped of a man his head on the streets. The first reason why they do not attack is probably typical group behavior where everybody is expecting someone else to help. Secondly, yeah, let's attack two men covered in blood that just beheaded a man on the streets, armed with a knife and hatchet I guess gun control in the UK would make it very difficult for a pedestrian to do anything in that situation. But that doesn't explain why they would stick around and remain to be the potential next victim. Also, out of curiosity I looked up UK laws on other types of non-lethal weapons like stun guns, night sticks, etc. All are apparently illegal to possess, so I guess you're right. Makes me glad I live in the U.S. where I at least have some sort of self defense at my disposal. The way we see it: one guy died and people having guns would not of prevented that death. What gun control did was stop a second person from dying. As for the sheep thing: it's London. Half the people would of been oblivious to the incident. Of those who noticed, several would of called the police. There is no point in every single person calling the police as they only need to be called once. Why run away from a guy with a gun? By staying calm there was less chance of them being attacked. That's assuming that the murderers didn't decide to kill someone else who was watching. Maybe they decide to get mad at one of the pedestrians trying to help the victim. It was reported they were only allowing women to come near the victim, threatening any other men who tried to help. There could have easily been another incident before the police arrived. The point being that I'd rather not trust someone who just committed murder and started preaching like a madman. Anything could have happened before the police arrived, especially since the murderers probably knew they were the only ones around with lethal weapons. "Why run away from a guy with a gun?". Besides the fact that's just a blatantly stupid question in itself, there were plenty of reasons to run away in that situation. Edit: Now that I think about it, the comparison to sheep was my mistake. At least sheep know how to escape from a deadly threat. Comparing them to the pedestrians would be an insult to sheep. It's not assuming anything. It happened and we know the outcome. One person died and the two attackers were injured. This is fact, not assumption. There were plenty of reasons to calmly distance yourself from the attackers, not to run away. People who have different views to you are not sheep or anything else, just because you cannot understand their views. The problem is your narrow-mindedness and not with other people. There is another thread for gun control yet you deliberately began the argument in this one because you look for any excuse to twist facts to fit your existing beliefs.
How does knowing the outcome change the fact that the murderers were still perfectly capable of harming more innocent people, whether by accident or on purpose? Let's keep in mind some basic facts. The murderers were remaining at the scene with weapons in hand, telling witnesses that they intend on "staying and fighting" (read the above updates). Exactly what part of that scenario tells you not to run for safety? I'd really like to know, since you have "plenty of reasons" after all.
How does my post in any way entail the gun control debate? Just because I said I'm thankful of my rights as a U.S. citizen? There's no "opinion" involved to debate here. When crazy people with a gun kill someone and start preaching their beliefs, common sense should be the only thing to consider. Are you saying that it was the witnesses "opinion" that they should stick around for a shootout between the murderer and police, for absolutely no reason?
I value your ability to troll this forum with unnecessary debates and poor assumptions of me as an individual. But there's simply no fact twisting and no gun control argument that I'm trying to convey. I'm calling the witnesses sheep because of their lack of concern for personal safety during a situation that's dangerous and extreme enough to make international news headlines.
|
On May 23 2013 19:05 TheToaster wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 17:36 hzflank wrote:On May 23 2013 16:08 TheToaster wrote:On May 23 2013 15:44 hzflank wrote:On May 23 2013 15:20 TheToaster wrote:On May 23 2013 15:04 Uni1987 wrote:On May 23 2013 14:48 TheToaster wrote:
I can't even understand the pedestrian witnesses at all. They clearly see the dead guy and the murderer walking about, so they just keep standing on the sidewalk like a flock of sheep, staring at both the murderer(s) and the body? Wouldn't they either want to call and go get help, run away, or even try to beat up the murderer? Instead they stand around like a flock of sheep.
I'm talking about before the police arrived, during the OP's Youtube video. From watching another interview online, apparently the murderers were even telling witnesses to call the police. What the fuck, did they honestly need to be told to call the police? Yes, let's attack two men that just chopped of a man his head on the streets. The first reason why they do not attack is probably typical group behavior where everybody is expecting someone else to help. Secondly, yeah, let's attack two men covered in blood that just beheaded a man on the streets, armed with a knife and hatchet I guess gun control in the UK would make it very difficult for a pedestrian to do anything in that situation. But that doesn't explain why they would stick around and remain to be the potential next victim. Also, out of curiosity I looked up UK laws on other types of non-lethal weapons like stun guns, night sticks, etc. All are apparently illegal to possess, so I guess you're right. Makes me glad I live in the U.S. where I at least have some sort of self defense at my disposal. The way we see it: one guy died and people having guns would not of prevented that death. What gun control did was stop a second person from dying. As for the sheep thing: it's London. Half the people would of been oblivious to the incident. Of those who noticed, several would of called the police. There is no point in every single person calling the police as they only need to be called once. Why run away from a guy with a gun? By staying calm there was less chance of them being attacked. That's assuming that the murderers didn't decide to kill someone else who was watching. Maybe they decide to get mad at one of the pedestrians trying to help the victim. It was reported they were only allowing women to come near the victim, threatening any other men who tried to help. There could have easily been another incident before the police arrived. The point being that I'd rather not trust someone who just committed murder and started preaching like a madman. Anything could have happened before the police arrived, especially since the murderers probably knew they were the only ones around with lethal weapons. "Why run away from a guy with a gun?". Besides the fact that's just a blatantly stupid question in itself, there were plenty of reasons to run away in that situation. Edit: Now that I think about it, the comparison to sheep was my mistake. At least sheep know how to escape from a deadly threat. Comparing them to the pedestrians would be an insult to sheep. It's not assuming anything. It happened and we know the outcome. One person died and the two attackers were injured. This is fact, not assumption. There were plenty of reasons to calmly distance yourself from the attackers, not to run away. People who have different views to you are not sheep or anything else, just because you cannot understand their views. The problem is your narrow-mindedness and not with other people. There is another thread for gun control yet you deliberately began the argument in this one because you look for any excuse to twist facts to fit your existing beliefs. How does knowing the outcome change the fact that the murderers were still perfectly capable of harming more innocent people, whether by accident or on purpose? Let's keep in mind some basic facts. The murderers were remaining at the scene with weapons in hand, telling witnesses that they intend on "staying and fighting" (read the above updates). Exactly what part of that scenario tells you not to run for safety? I'd really like to know, since you have "plenty of reasons" after all. How does my post in any way entail the gun control debate? Just because I said I'm thankful of my rights as a U.S. citizen? There's no "opinion" involved to debate here. When crazy people with a gun kill someone and start preaching their beliefs, common sense should be the only thing to consider. Are you saying that it was the witnesses "opinion" that they should stick around for a shootout between the murderer and police, for absolutely no reason? I value your ability to troll this forum with unnecessary debates and poor assumptions of me as an individual. But there's simply no fact twisting and no gun control argument that I'm trying to convey. I'm calling the witnesses sheep because of their lack of concern for personal safety during a situation that's dangerous and extreme enough to make international news headlines.
I'm curious, do you have example in the US where people in the street were able to stop a planned attack thanks to a concealed weapon?
|
On May 23 2013 15:20 TheToaster wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 15:04 Uni1987 wrote:On May 23 2013 14:48 TheToaster wrote:
I can't even understand the pedestrian witnesses at all. They clearly see the dead guy and the murderer walking about, so they just keep standing on the sidewalk like a flock of sheep, staring at both the murderer(s) and the body? Wouldn't they either want to call and go get help, run away, or even try to beat up the murderer? Instead they stand around like a flock of sheep.
I'm talking about before the police arrived, during the OP's Youtube video. From watching another interview online, apparently the murderers were even telling witnesses to call the police. What the fuck, did they honestly need to be told to call the police? Yes, let's attack two men that just chopped of a man his head on the streets. The first reason why they do not attack is probably typical group behavior where everybody is expecting someone else to help. Secondly, yeah, let's attack two men covered in blood that just beheaded a man on the streets, armed with a knife and hatchet I guess gun control in the UK would make it very difficult for a pedestrian to do anything in that situation. But that doesn't explain why they would stick around and remain to be the potential next victim. Also, out of curiosity I looked up UK laws on other types of non-lethal weapons like stun guns, night sticks, etc. All are apparently illegal to possess, so I guess you're right. Makes me glad I live in the U.S. where I at least have some sort of self defense at my disposal.
I personally feel safer not having to worry about the fact that anyone on the street might be carrying a gun :3
I guess that's just a cultural thing though.
This whole issue is awful though, but I really don't want the EDL/BNP whatever to gain from this, though it seems likely that they will.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
