50 Killed in Knife Attack in Chinese Mining Town

a reply to: misskat1

Ah.That happened in Bosnia too.A whole village wiped out,shortly before we got there.

Poor people.

a reply to: StoutBroux

I would agree, except the crap sites had articles about it. I would have a hard time believing BIN or The Guardian have better sources than our regular news sites.

a reply to: misskat1

No, this didnt really happen. As so many gun-haters have pointed out, mass killings are impossible without guns and we should all turn them in immediately. Plus, the motives which drive murder sprees like this only exist here in America because we're all so stupid and dont care about anything.

en.wikipedia.org...

Turkey has a sizeable number of Muslim Uyghur people who hail from the Xinjiang region of China. They have come in large numbers since the early 1950s from the northwestern provinces of China, and as part of their migration to the Middle East, many chose to settle down in urban centres of Turkey. Today, they have effectively associated themselves with the local economy and can be seen practicing in various forms of trade./

East Turkistan is the homeland of the Turkic speaking Uyghurs and other central Asian peoples such as Kazaks, Kyrgyz, Tatars, Uzbeks, and Tajiks. According to the latest Chinese census, the present population of these Muslims is slightly over 11 million; among these, the 8.68 million Uyghurs constitute the majority. However, Uyghur sources indicate that Uyghur population in East Turkistan exceeds 15 million.

East Turkistan is located beyond a logical boundary of China, the Great Wall. Historically, East Turkistan is a part of Central Asia, not of China. East Turkistan's people are not Chinese; they are Turks of Central Asia.

****SNIP****

Uyghurs embraced Islam in A.D. 934 during the Karahanid Kingdom. Kashgar, the capital of the Kingdom, quickly became one of the major learning centers of Islam.

Terrorist attacks have been spreading out of Xinjiang in recent years. From the 1990s to the late 2000s, the vast majority of terrorist acts were limited to Xinjiang, while the Chinese Uyghur terrorists were known to be based in Xinjiang and in relatively unstable neighboring countries such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, and in Central Asia. Recently, however, China has suffered attacks in several cities all over its territory. In the most symbolic attack, a car loaded with explosives crashed into a group of tourists under the portrait of Mao Zedong in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square on October 28, 2013. The most brutal attack occurred five months later, in March 2014, at Kunming railway station (in the capital city of Yunnan province) followed by two attacks at Guangzhou railway station (in the capital of Guangdong province) in May 2014 and March 2015. While the first attack obviously targeted China’s symbols of power, the following ones might be explained in relation to the failed attempts by Uyghur extremists to leave China via the southern borders and join terrorist networks abroad.

The geographical expansion of Chinese terrorism can also be observed outside of China’s borders, e.g. in Central Asia and the Hindu Kush region. Militant Uyghurs fought alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan against the Soviets in the 1980s and then against the international coalition (ISAF) in the early 2000s. However, more recently, in May 2014 the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan urged all Taliban groups to target Chinese interests in the region, especially embassies, companies, and Chinese nationals.

thediplomat.com...

Yeah okay. The Diplomat link is an excellent article to read. It is in four parts of which I linked to the second part.

clearly we should ban knives!

oh yeah and we should ban killing people!!
erm, what...? already banned?

well, seems if someone wants to kill he'll be not very interested in laws.

Horrible. But lets put some perspective on this:

Nine suspects are being pursued after they launched a coordinated knife attack and killed 50 workers at a northwestern Chinese coal mine, reports Radio Free Asia....

After overtaking security guards, the attackers killed the workers while they were asleep in bunkhouses at the Sogan colliery in Aksu. Another 50 workers were injured.

- my emphasis

By my math, that's an average of 5.56 dead per attacker, and the same wounded.

Let's put semi-automatic, high capacity firearms in their hands - the type with which someone could kill dozens of people in seconds - and the death toll would have been far greater.
Had the victims been awake, i daresay the knife attack would not have been so successful.


So, sure, people will find a way to kill if they don't have access to firearms, they'll just be a lot less effective.

originally posted by: Badgered1
Horrible. But lets put some perspective on this:

Nine suspects are being pursued after they launched a coordinated knife attack and killed 50 workers at a northwestern Chinese coal mine, reports Radio Free Asia....

After overtaking security guards, the attackers killed the workers while they were asleep in bunkhouses at the Sogan colliery in Aksu. Another 50 workers were injured.

- my emphasis

By my math, that's an average of 5.56 dead per attacker, and the same wounded.

Let's put semi-automatic, high capacity firearms in their hands - the type with which someone could kill dozens of people in seconds - and the death toll would have been far greater.
Had the victims been awake, i daresay the knife attack would not have been so successful.


So, sure, people will find a way to kill if they don't have access to firearms, they'll just be a lot less effective.

Actually, if they had mini nukes, they could have killed thousands in one swoop.

You were just joking with your post....weren't you?

a reply to: Badgered1
The average thing isn't great...
If you average the numbers of Iraqis and Afghan insurgents killed by the rounds fired....
It takes 250,000 rounds per insurgent.
Those are GAO numbers.
It makes knives seem quite efficient.
Jonathan Turley

Sad.
If only one of those citizens owned a gun.
Just one gun could have prevented this from happening.

a reply to: network dude

So we can talk about how a gun would stop this but not how it could have made it worse?

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: network dude

So we can talk about how a gun would stop this but not how it could have made it worse?

Guns are apparently fairly innocuous.
See my post above.
The highly trained US military can fire 250,000 rounds two guys and only one will get killed.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Badgered1
Horrible. But lets put some perspective on this:

Nine suspects are being pursued after they launched a coordinated knife attack and killed 50 workers at a northwestern Chinese coal mine, reports Radio Free Asia....

After overtaking security guards, the attackers killed the workers while they were asleep in bunkhouses at the Sogan colliery in Aksu. Another 50 workers were injured.

- my emphasis

By my math, that's an average of 5.56 dead per attacker, and the same wounded.

Let's put semi-automatic, high capacity firearms in their hands - the type with which someone could kill dozens of people in seconds - and the death toll would have been far greater.
Had the victims been awake, i daresay the knife attack would not have been so successful.


So, sure, people will find a way to kill if they don't have access to firearms, they'll just be a lot less effective.

Actually, if they had mini nukes, they could have killed thousands in one swoop.

You were just joking with your post....weren't you?

Only if the OP was.
There was a coordinated attack, by an organized group, on sleeping people FOLLOWING a coordinated disabling of the armed guards.
This was NOT one person with a gun walking into a traditionally safe area and opening fire with a high power gun on children. Comparing the two, or using the "violence will happen" meme is ridiculous.

Point is, "guns don't kill people!" They just make it a hell of a lot easier, don't they?

As for the 'mini-nukes' comment. Only one country ever nuked another. Same one that finds it okay to kill children with guns, so long as gun buyers aren't inconvenienced during their purchase.
And then everyone pretends they care about life.

a reply to: butcherguy
Yes I saw your one example, doesn't change what I said.

And you know that isn't saying it is literally taking soilders ans marines 250k to kill one person.

How many people could be killed by a single knife wielder? (apparently 5.5 when they victims are sleeping). How many people would be killed by a gang of nine wielding semi-automatic weapons in a coordinated attack with tons of ammo while wearing body armor?

Just saying - this isn't a one-to-one comparison here...

- AB

originally posted by: NowWhat
Sad.
If only one of those citizens owned a gun.
Just one gun could have prevented this from happening.

If only they were awake when they were attacked.

Just a hypothetical here:
Imagine a situation where there is a lone-wolf, armed to the teeth, obviously disturbed individual who is set of mass-murdering a bunch of children. It's a horrible thing to think about, but it happens all the time, strangely. These people tend not to have the nerve when they don't have the guns that granddad left lying around the house.

Anyway, this guy decides he's going into - say - a mall to wreak havoc.
Surrounding him are many law-abiding citizens with their favorite weapon.
As our anti-hero begins his shennanigans, one/some/all of the armed citizenry pull their weapons to stop the violence.
The police arrive just at that moment.
They see only people carrying guns.
Whose fault is it if the armed Samaritan is mistaken for the bad guy, and is cut down in a hail of police gunfire?
Again, this is just hypothetical.
Let's move that scenario to a movie theater. Everyone is enjoying the picture when someone starts shooting.
It's dark, it's confusing. Our hero citizenry hear the gunfire and draw their weapons.
Only, all they can see is the guy to their right with a drawn weapon. They've heard gunfire, and this guy has a gun. They shoot. Someone fifteen rows back sees the shot, and fires at what they consider the shooter. See where this is going?

Owning a gun is one thing. Owning a gun and going to the range to practice your marksmanship is another. Both fine.
Owning a gun and knowing how to react in a tactical situation is most uncommon.
There's practical reasons why 'more gunsssss' is not always the best option.

So. If we can ban everything that could possibly be used to murder someone else, where does that leave us? Or do we just ban guns, and smile each day knowing that yesterdays school stabbing could have been worse? Phew! Glad they didn't have a gun.
It's not about the method, or the inanimate object used to do the killing. It's about people. We've been killing each other for many thousands of years. It won't stop when you ban everything. You have to change the hearts and minds of people, not just the laws that govern them.

a reply to: Badgered1

I think it could be argued that if a gun was used when the Guards were first attacked, the sound could have woke up the sleeping miners and actually saved some lives.

originally posted by: Badgered1
Horrible. But lets put some perspective on this:

Nine suspects are being pursued after they launched a coordinated knife attack and killed 50 workers at a northwestern Chinese coal mine, reports Radio Free Asia....

After overtaking security guards, the attackers killed the workers while they were asleep in bunkhouses at the Sogan colliery in Aksu. Another 50 workers were injured.

- my emphasis

By my math, that's an average of 5.56 dead per attacker, and the same wounded.

Let's put semi-automatic, high capacity firearms in their hands - the type with which someone could kill dozens of people in seconds - and the death toll would have been far greater.
Had the victims been awake, i daresay the knife attack would not have been so successful.


So, sure, people will find a way to kill if they don't have access to firearms, they'll just be a lot less effective.

A mass shooting is any time four or more people are shot.

By your math, each attacker accounted for nearly six people.

So that's nine mass stabbings in one day. Thanks for the perspective.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: network dude

So we can talk about how a gun would stop this but not how it could have made it worse?

Guns are apparently fairly innocuous.
See my post above.
The highly trained US military can fire 250,000 rounds two guys and only one will get killed.

That's because the highly trained US military employs this little thing called "fire suppression." Shoot a whole bunch of rounds at somebody so he ducks, keep shooting so he keeps ducking, and then your homie hits his flank and rolls him up.

But it sounds way cooler if we pretend that all 250k rounds are actually aimed fire.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I am aware.
I was pointing out the dangers of using averages.
For all we know, one knife wielder may have killed 46 people in the OP story.