| Forum Index > General Forum |
Please go to the Gun Thread to discuss gun laws in the USA, and related topics. Do not use this thread. | ||
|
amazingxkcd
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
On June 13 2016 12:24 Parlortricks wrote: the shooter had 3 hours to do his work and one of the exits was barricaded by a fleeing clubgoer Doesn't make sense to me. Why would that hit barricade door to keep him in with shooter | ||
|
DickMcFanny
Ireland1076 Posts
I'm not saying I would have the courage, or that I wouldn't panic, but I do wonder why you never heard of them getting disarmed and beaten to death by the horde of people they're shooting at. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9246 Posts
| ||
|
JW_DTLA
242 Posts
| ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On June 13 2016 15:03 DickMcFanny wrote: Not to pull a Ben Carson here, but honestly, in a night club that had I'm assuming more than 150 people in it, how does a shooter get to kill that many before they collectively bash his head in? I'm not saying I would have the courage, or that I wouldn't panic, but I do wonder why you never heard of them getting disarmed and beaten to death by the horde of people they're shooting at. Like you say, it is a panic frenzy. It would take a few trained and combat-experienced people to remain calm enough to actually confront a gunman wielding an assault rifle. | ||
|
Wegandi
United States2455 Posts
On June 13 2016 15:18 JW_DTLA wrote: The conservative fascination with the phrase "Radical Islam" is beyond ridiculous. Sam Harris uses the term "Jihadism", which is vastly more accurate and significantly less inflammatory. The Saudi government is made up of hardcore Islamists, but they aren't Jihadists. However, the USA is in the business of killing Jihadists (see, the last 20 years). We don't kill Radical Islam because that is just an idea. We don't even fight Radical Islam as an idea (outside of the hard-atheists). But we do kill Jihadists because they are men taking definable actions. Am I understanding you right that your position here is that the House of Saud is not as culpable as the people they finance? There's a reason that a bunch of the 9/11 report was never released. The only reason that the US isn't "fighting" Saudi Arabia is because of geo-political and military industrial complex reasons, not because they aren't some of the most vociferous fomentors of the kind of Islam that the term "Radical Islam" intends to describe (read: Wahhabism, et. al.). I'm also surprised how much the "left" (and I use the quotation marks around terms that I find nebulous and not descriptive, but is nonetheless understood to mean certain things to wider audiences) defends such a barbaric religion while at the same time so often delivering as much or more disdain for Christianity than the "right" does for Islam. The folks committing terrorism wouldn't have 1/800th the influence and notoriety they do without the House of Saud. They are honestly, the hornets nest. Which if any person is rationally following the Mid-East you'd see how much a cluster-fuck it is since the Ottoman Empire was destroyed and colonialism (UK and US) reared its nasty head. That isn't to diminish however, the extremely illiberal nature of Wahhabism. Personally, I want all US serviceman to come home and close all foreign bases, stop the wars, the drones, etc., the interventions, the mercantilism, etc. which would do wonders for our security (no one is bombing Switzerland), but our current FP is the worst of both worlds. Far too much interference, droning, playing cutesy geo-politics, etc., but not having the audacity or tenacity to destroy the Wahhabists. Of course though, that was never the goal or the point. Terrorism is the best excuse for the MIC and the Executive war-mongerers / totalitarians ever conceived. As you said, it's never-ending, but if they really wanted to, they could do what they did to the Native Americans, or the Spanish did to South America, etc. | ||
|
Wintex
Norway16838 Posts
On June 13 2016 09:03 Djzapz wrote: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/u8vwRUq.jpg) Ugh... disturbing thought this is absolutely disturbing... | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
| ||
|
mahrgell
Germany3943 Posts
On June 13 2016 15:06 Sent. wrote: Nobody wants to go in first This does not seem the case in other incidents. Many of the surviving victims of the Bataclan attack in Paris reported that a fair number of people tried to attack the gunmen there, but were gunned down before they were able to do so. Also another number of people tried to throw themselves in front, to shield others. The moment people know their death is almost inevitable, many actually do try to at least fend off others. Same as many soldiers, even if not trained to do so, throwselves on grenades they can't evade anymore. Or the passengers of that 9/11 flight, knowing they would not survive this anyway, trying to storm the cockpit, which in the end caused the plane to go down on an empty field instead of Washington DC. But the attacker probably didn't stand just right in the middle of the dancefloor in handreach of 2 dozen people. And as soon as he has some distance between himself and any "defenders" and preferably some height advantage, good luck rushing him down. Because while people may turn on him, this is no coordinated effort nonetheless. And then this ends like you know from esports when teams lack coordination. Everyone going in 1by1 and fight lost. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7917 Posts
| ||
|
pmh
1366 Posts
| ||
|
Nedereden
777 Posts
On June 13 2016 15:18 JW_DTLA wrote: The conservative fascination with the phrase "Radical Islam" is beyond ridiculous. Sam Harris uses the term "Jihadism", which is vastly more accurate and significantly less inflammatory. The Saudi government is made up of hardcore Islamists, but they aren't Jihadists. However, the USA is in the business of killing Jihadists (see, the last 20 years). We don't kill Radical Islam because that is just an idea. We don't even fight Radical Islam as an idea (outside of the hard-atheists). But we do kill Jihadists because they are men taking definable actions. Funnily enough the phraseology doesn't matter at all! The word 'jihadi' while in my mind being arguably more incendiary, would do just fine. Radical Islamic TERROR as a phrase is essentially two accurate descriptives for the terrorists in question. Why this is even an issue to bring up is beyond me. You have to use descriptives when classifying a broad group else THAT would be bigotry! However the liberal media has confused the muricans so much they think they are somehow being offensive when all they're doing is just using acceptable lexicon. Speaking about the entity of radical Islamic terror or jihadis or whatever, however is extremely important because calling a spade a spade is the first step to any antiterrorism action plan. If you don't even want to target the specific group attacking you in words how can you be expected to do so in deed? | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45049 Posts
On June 13 2016 19:15 Biff The Understudy wrote: I never thought it would ever happened, but Oliver yesterday was really touching. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YS8cm3kmyWs Awesome video. | ||
|
Parlortricks
United States111 Posts
On June 13 2016 14:29 amazingxkcd wrote: Doesn't make sense to me. Why would that hit barricade door to keep him in with shooter he and i believe a couple others escaped into an employee only exit in the back and set up barricades to keep what they thought was the gunman from reaching them, and i think logical outcome was that it did more harm than good if you catch my meaning. maybe a reconstruction of the body placement will be produced or a first responder account will confirm my suspicions. anyway, per some interviews with survivors, i think the reason no one fought back was because he told everyone he was the fourth shooter, that there were snipers on the roofs and even a woman in attendance who wore a suicide vest. in a club of 300+ with who knows how many dead or injured it wouldn't be too far fetched to believe him. On June 13 2016 19:44 pmh wrote: Also don't get why it took so long, 3 hours? Maybe need a new protocol for hostage situations,even more so when it comes to terror. Storm them asap and get it over with,waiting is not going to help. Don't give them time to slowly clear all possible hiding places. i'm not law enforcement and so i don't know their protocols. i'm sure there will be plenty of fire coming if the review boards find the police department botched the situation. | ||
|
Luolis
Finland7139 Posts
On June 13 2016 09:05 SK.Testie wrote: - Donald J. Trump + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/American-Flag-Bald-Eagle-Getty-Images.jpg) User was temp banned for this post. Disgusting | ||
|
yB.TeH
Germany414 Posts
On June 13 2016 09:05 SK.Testie wrote: - Donald J. Trump + Show Spoiler + User was temp banned for this post. that post gave me freedom | ||
|
Laserist
Turkey4269 Posts
Islam definitely has a disgusting way of looking at the "non-orthodox" ways of life. You might not share the same view and it is understandable to defend it but it doesn't mean a vast majority of the believers against modern ways of life. Eventually statistically someone with enough "courage" or "zeal" would commit such subhuman act. I live in a country with a very strong Islamic belief and personally rejected it at some point so I exposed similar stuff more than most of the others here. So moral high ground defense like "religion of peace" etc.. imo is bullshit. The problem is not some maniac doing a mad case. There is a systematic behind it which is the religion in that case. Holy scripts also encourage jihad and enforce "the way of Islam" very different than modern life we understand. Denying this can be only a sign of personal enlightenment that has nothing to do with the religion itself. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On June 13 2016 21:09 Laserist wrote: My condolences. Islam definitely has a disgusting way of looking at the "non-orthodox" ways of life. You might not share the same view and it is understandable to defend it but it doesn't mean a vast majority of the believers against modern ways of life. Eventually statistically someone with enough "courage" or "zeal" would commit such subhuman act. I live in a country with a very strong Islamic belief and personally rejected it at some point so I exposed similar stuff more than most of the others here. So moral high ground defense like "religion of peace" etc.. imo is bullshit. The problem is not some maniac doing a mad case. There is a systematic behind it which is the religion in that case. Holy scripts also encourage jihad and enforce "the way of Islam" very different than modern life we understand. Denying this can be only a sign of personal enlightenment that has nothing to do with the religion itself. Funnily enough, in muslims countries they are way more open about this topic than in europe and the US. I had familly in Algeria and they were pretty clear on radical islam : it is a plague. 200 000 people died due to radical islam in Algeria, people don't have the luxury to find excuses, play on words, just to argue that no it's not radical islam but "an homophobe" or something else. People have a hard time understanding that freedom is "saying that two and two equal four". | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9717 Posts
On June 14 2016 02:32 WhiteDog wrote: Funnily enough, in muslims countries they are way more open about this topic than in europe and the US. I had familly in Algeria and they were pretty clear on radical islam : it is a plague. 200 000 people died due to radical islam in Algeria, people don't have the luxury to find excuses, play on words, just to argue that no it's not radical islam but "an homophobe" or something else. People have a hard time understanding that freedom is "saying that two and two equal four". I know this is a bit pedantic but what on Earth does the phrase "two and two equal four" have to do with freedom. Freedom in this case is a buzzword. If you want to make sense, then you should imply that freedom is the ability to say that two plus two equals five if that's what you want to say. | ||
| ||
|
|
IPSL
ZZZero vs rasowy
Napoleon vs KameZerg
OSC
BSL 21
Tarson vs Julia
Doodle vs OldBoy
eOnzErG vs WolFix
StRyKeR vs Aeternum
Sparkling Tuna Cup
RSL Revival
Reynor vs sOs
Maru vs Ryung
Kung Fu Cup
Cure vs TBD
Reynor vs TBD
WardiTV Korean Royale
BSL 21
JDConan vs Semih
Dragon vs Dienmax
Tech vs NewOcean
TerrOr vs Artosis
IPSL
Dewalt vs WolFix
eOnzErG vs Bonyth
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
