Obama On San Bernardino Shooting: 'We Have A Pattern Now Of Mass Shootings'

originally posted by: theonenonlyone

originally posted by: Toseekthetruth
We need every ameican to be armed and able to defend themselves! How many people would have lost their lives if 28 of the 14 dead and 14 injured had been armed?! Seriously! It infuriates me that they think its a good idea to take away out right to defend ourselves. Guns will always be in the hands of those who wish to do harm. At lat let us have a fighting chance! a reply to: neo96

This is one of the most absurd replies ever, the answer to gun violence is more guns.

How that makes sense to you, is crazy. Would you throw more fire on a fire to put it out?

So when confronted by someone meaning to harm or kill you, your suggestion is to do what ? Run to a gun free zone and find your safe space ? Seems more logical to learn to protect yourself with whatever will do the job.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I think it is more basic than that, leadership is mildly important.

It all stems from the home.
Parents
Family
Morality and education in the home extends to wider society such as school or work.

There is a cycle destruction and damaged lives that all starts from the home.

originally posted by: zazzafrazz
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I think it is more basic than that, leadership is mildly important.

It all stems from the home.
Parents
Family
Morality and education in the home extends to wider society such as school or work.

There is a cycle destruction and damaged lives that all starts from the home.

agreed completely

a reply to: eriktheawful

Interesting point.

Say the anti 2nd people got their way and guns went away.

And the next time there's a mass shooting, what freedoms would they remove next?

'We Have A Pattern Now Of Mass Shootings'

Yes, we have an obvious pattern here, and it's not "mass shootings" at all.
- It's about too many coincidences of "police drills-trainings" and "mass shootings" in the same location on the same day.
- It's about Obama's every God dam speeches with "Gun" and "mass murder" references.

This is a clear cut social engineering of the masses to be aware of a "trending issue", and the obvious agenda of "Gun Control".

Why can't Obama just spit out, "We need your guns citizens!"

Peace

originally posted by: neo96
Well people here we are once again. Before the bodies are even cold. Before any of us even know what the real facts are. With the San Bernadino shooter(s) at large. Obama acts like Obama because as a general rule he doesn't even wait for facts. Same old. Same old from our 'fearless leader.

Hes running his mouth pushing the same thing he has been for the past seven YEARS.

President Barack Obama commented Wednesday on the shooting in San Bernardino, California, where at least 14 people were killed and an additional 14 were injured according to police. "We have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world, and there's some steps we could take, not to eliminate every one of these mass shootings, but to improve the odds that they don't happen as frequently, common-sense gun safety laws, stronger background checks," Obama said during an interview with CBS News' Norah O'Donnell.

Obama On San Bernardino Shooting: 'We Have A Pattern Now Of Mass Shootings'

Mr. Sensitivity: At Paris News Conference, Obama Says Mass Shootings Only Happen In America

Obama pushes for gun control after Planned Parenthood shooting

16 Times Obama's Shame

Let's not forget California has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country.

Let's not forget that current administration has been arming ISIS with 'weapons of war' in Syria.

Let's not forget that the current administration role during Fast and Furious arming Mexican Drug Cartels.

Let's not forget everything he has been giving those people in other countries he wants banned here.

Truth, Justice, and the American way.

Golf clap Mr, President.

The bodies aren't even cold.

The normal pattern Obama is referring to is .....crazed , drugged, underemployed, basement dwelling, social skills lacking , young white male killing with no apparent plausible motive. What Obama is missing on this current , still developing California case is that it's not the normal pattern. Three person team , tactical gear, explosives and most importantly....it's still a developing case that could still be found to be terrorist, not a mass shooting.

a reply to: theonenonlyone

If you blow up a bomb you can put a fire out.

It does make sense. If even one of those victums had a gun on them,they could have taken out at least one of the killers and kept them from killing more. What do you think the police do once they get there? Call them bad names? They shoot them to kill them,because thats how you stop it. If the citizens are armed,they are right there when it starts and can stop it from going any further.

There is more to this story than what we know so far. 3 Shooters all dressed the same working together? This isn't a mentally ill person or persons. This is some people that had an agenda. Lets see where this rabbit hole goes......

a reply to: neo96

It wasn't until recently was that created. Because of FEAR MONGERING from Obama, and his party. A right is a RIGHT. People do not have to ask the states permission to exercise it.

If the State is the one enforcing that right and can redraft the constitution and/or repeal a law it is a privilege.Period.
The founding father's could've left out the 2nd amendment, but they didn't because they thought the people of their new land should be allowed the privilege to arm themselves against both a foreign(British Imperial empire)and domestic threat(revolting slaves) as citizen's in Europe lacked the privilege to do so. Unless you joined the army of course.

But they didn't want a national army, it would be too expensive to maintain so early on in the country's economic development. This is back when some states were still bartering for goods and services for Christs sake.

To ignore the historical context of why this amendment was drafted in the constitution, is missing the intent behind the 2nd amendment, even at the time you still needed local authorities permission to own a firearm because the requirement was to join a state regulated militia.

Could you imagine how the fathers of America would react at the firearms we've developed today? They'd be flabbergasted and amazed but it would probably result in a likely redraft of the 2nd amendment. Or at least consider removing it all together.

originally posted by: Toseekthetruth
We need every ameican to be armed and able to defend themselves! How many people would have lost their lives if 28 of the 14 dead and 14 injured had been armed?! Seriously! It infuriates me that they think its a good idea to take away out right to defend ourselves. Guns will always be in the hands of those who wish to do harm. At lat let us have a fighting chance! a reply to: neo96

Look this happens mostly in America,yes there are terrorist attacks in other industrialized nations with commonsense policies towards guns,but when we have politicians and the NRA block saying it's ok to sell guns to people who can't even board a freaking plane because they are so dangerous, we have a problem, there are no freaking reason to have armor piercing bullets in the general civilian population unless you want to kill cops, stop with the BS already, America is already over armed and perhaps rivaling high safety nations like Somalia or Yemen.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Not all people who own guns are conservatives.

This is what you don't get. The American people people not monolithic. As such how we exercise our rights does not make us monolithic.

Just because I own a gun doesn't mean that I am responsible for an asshole that lives in California shooting up the town. People who own guns aren't necessarily ideologically linked either.

Owning a gun isn't an ideology. It's an exercise of a right. It's an individual choice, not a collective organization. Stop trying to make it such.

a reply to: Willtell

The great 'uniter" has been the great "divider" . You can prove this just by listening to any speech he has ever given.From Day 1. This is his goal .
1) The most transparent government i the history of the US - accomplished the opposite
2) Work with the other "side" in government to progress this country - does the opposite
3) Swore to uphold the Constitution - has long ago broken that vow .
4) There is no "black , brown , white , red America -just America" - has done more to separate these rather than bringing them together.

the list of "achievements" of the OPPOSITEs of what his pre-President speeches declared go on.
"The Wizard's First Rule" applies to the people of this country . Not once but twice.

Don’t know what the fuss is about.... in the US 90 people are killed by firearms every single
day.

Guns don't kill people ..right?

a reply to: NateTheAnimator

f the State is the one enforcing that right and can redraft the constitution and/or repeal a law it is a privilege.Period.

No they can't.

Really think people are going to stand for rewritinng almost the entire bill of rights, and the 14th amendments ?

Then good luck getting it ratfied by all '57' states.

Because that is what it would take.

You know what??? I am say it...TAKE THE GAWDDAMED GUNS. screw your fantasies about storming the white house, we have a vote to do that less bloodily lets cherish and protect that, what a bunch o paranoid manics running with excuses for every mass killings, illegal guns flood the streets, legal means is already rendered useless with loopholes you could drive a tank through, in the parts of the old west you had to turn in your guns upon entering town and that's when we were considered less civilized.

a reply to: neo96

Obama-

Ya know I'm starting to see a pattern develop
here. All these ethnic slurs and racial tension.
Terrorism here, an inside job there..
Topple a government while it's leader takes a crap.
Run guns and return with drugs.
Fill every country with refugees and aliens to
the point they and the countries homeland
population. Will rip each other apart given the
right economic environment. Naturally providing us
with plenty of reason to disarm everyone. Spilling
a massive amount of blood everyday and even more
during that process. But what i'm seeing lately does
disturb me a great deal. i don't know i get the feeling
y'all just don't like evil.

I think it's time for a group hug!

a reply to: Spider879

They already did in California.

Gun laws in California regulate the sale, possession, and use of firearms and ammunition in the state of California in the United States

The gun laws of California[3][4] are some of the most restrictive in the United States. A Firearm Safety Certificate, obtained by passing a written test, is required for gun purchases.[5] Handguns sold by dealers must be "California legal" by being listed on the state's Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale.[6] This roster, which requires handgun manufacturers to pay a fee and submit specific models for safety testing, has become progressively more stringent over time and is currently the subject of a federal civil rights lawsuit on the basis that it is a de facto ban on new handgun models.[7] Private sales of firearms must be done through a licensed dealer. All firearm sales are recorded by the state, and have a ten-day waiting period. Unlike most other states, California has no provision in its state constitution that explicitly guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms.[1] The California Supreme Court has maintained that most of California's restrictive gun laws are constitutional, based on the fact that the state's constitution does not explicitly guarantee private citizens the right to purchase, possess, or carry firearms. However, recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions of Heller (2008) and McDonald (2010) established that the Second Amendment applies to all states within the Union, and many of California's gun laws are now being challenged in the federal courts.[8]

en.wikipedia.org...

I particularly like this part:

California has no provision in its state constitution that explicitly guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms.[

And guess what ?

'Mass Shootings' still happen in the Peoples Republic of California.

Firearm ownership law in the People's Republic of China heavily regulates the ownership of firearms. Generally, private citizens are not allowed to possess firearms. Firearms can be used by law enforcement, the military and paramilitary, or security personnel protecting property of state importance (including the arms industry, financial institutions, storage of resources, and scientific research institutions).

en.wikipedia.org...

Let's have another helping!

a reply to: neo96

Of course they can. They, the state have the power to do so. Congress would just have to be coerced or paid off (which wouldn't be that hard) to do so but your right it would require quite a bit of effort to pull that feat over the American people.

Then good luck getting it ratfied by all '57' states.

It would only require 3/4(38) of the states to ratify the constitution.

Im pro gun, have ccl license, and have been thoroughly trained. That being said I would not be opposed to a CCL like course for all new gun owners, background checks, and no open carry.

Far too many people buy a gun with no idea how to safely use it. For example if you didn't know any better some may assume once you pull a clip out the gun isn't loaded. In actuallity there may be one in the chamber. People die all the time cleaning their new gun cause of the above referenced example.

Laws like gun free zones are not good idea's IMO and I ignore them in most places except court houses and such. I can be asked to leave if they notice Im carrying but it's not against the law. (in my state anyway)

Im far from an Obama fan but if his idea's for gun safety are related to what I mentioned above then I'm ok with that. Problem is I don;t trust Obama and I can see him pushing one set of idea's that end up being far to reaching. Obamacare ring a bell in this regard?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ~Lucidity

When didn't we have a problem? Name the period in recent history where there were no mass slayings.

Asking when we didn't have a problem doesn't address the problem.

We don't know for sure as we're all always stating here that the definitions used by the FBI are nebulous.

The San Bernardino shooting is the second mass shooting today and the 355th this year

This is at least the third mass shooting since the rampage in Colorado Springs last Friday.

The second shooting today was in Savannah, GA this morning.

a reply to: neo96

The problem lays with other states, hence that tank I spoke about and that's just the Legal part, why can't we look at other nations similar to us and do what they do, I am sure they have their share of crazies,misfits and terrorist but they don't have the same problem as we do.