Orlando Nightclub Massacre

Well you know, this is what I think about messing with the Gun laws, imagine if we did outlaw gun ownership and purchase, how much do you want to bet that it would just make things worse.

AR-15 is nothing compared to what is out there that could be smuggled in...

a reply to: vjr1113

Please don't repeat yourself on my account. There have been a lot of things said on this thread, forgive me if I can't follow every single one to the letter.

Also what does that have to do with the gun merchant not being under investigation? Is there evidence there was even a check ran on the guy before he purchased the guns? Do we know where he got them? Has that person been interviewed?

originally posted by: SomeDumbBroad

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: SomeDumbBroad

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: SomeDumbBroad

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: SomeDumbBroad

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: DancedWithWolves
a reply to: Annee

Yes it is. And completely unnecessary to hurt someone who lost someone they knew in this tragedy. Turn off your computer and sleep on it. Please.

NO, It's Not!

The President of the United States represents EVERY citizen.

Gun advocates get their panties in a bunch if he even hints at gun control. Too Bad.

He is the President of anti-gun citizens too. Their voices are just as valid as pro-gun citizens.

The fact that gun laws are even brought up in the time of tragedy is an insult. A gun didn't go off and kill 50 people... a PERSON opened fire.

It's not a gun issue, it's a human issue.

That's nice, but 50 people are dead. By gun assault.

My original post was to someone complaining about Obama saying something about gun control in his speech.

I said he is everyone's president, not just yours.

50 people are dead because of one PERSONS actions. Using an inanimate object as a scapegoat is a fallacy.

I am a gun owner. I do not blame guns.

But, that was not my point.

So then you know that there are laws and procedures in place to register and obtain guns already.... what other laws should their possibly be?

That is not what I was addressing.

Weren't you talking about gun laws and Obama addressing the "need" for more restrictions gun control?

NO.

A poster was complaining about Obama talking about gun control.

I basically said, he's everyone's president. Not just gun supporters. He needs to address both.

originally posted by: Brainiac

Have you heard the historic saying, if you want peace, be ready for war.

Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Yes, that is the quote of heretics.

The truth is; If you want peace, be peaceful.

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

watch the video. we cant not sell guns to people who are watched by the government. nra says its a second amend violation and congress sure as hell isnt going to help obama even if its for good.there is no way to stop an isis supporter from buying weapons.

yt

a reply to: Brainiac

I guess it is like any intel.

You can only act with impunity if you can prove an immediate and active threat is present.

Without such proof you are open to the litigious ways of the US legal system.

This unfortunately sounds like the case here.

US law may very well change to reflect this current handicap in the fight against extremist terrorism.

originally posted by: vjr1113

we cant not sell guns to people who are watched by the government.]

You can't screen everyone who is co-dependent for firearms purchases.

Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook and now this Orlando guy all occured after the shooter experienced some major event of emotional abandonment and/or rejection.

Or can gun purchases be screened for co-dependency?

This could very well be the US equivalent of Australia's Port Arthur massacre.

Although not of a muslim terror nature, it lead to the gun control we have in place today.

The statistics say this has worked. We are not gun free as many think. We do however have very strict controls and regulations regarding arms.

originally posted by: vjr1113
a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

watch the video. we cant not sell guns to people who are watched by the government. nra says its a second amend violation and congress sure as hell isnt going to help obama even if its for good.there is no way to stop an isis supporter from buying weapons.

yt

I get where you are coming from, I truly do.

Here is my question.

Where do civil liberties end and totalitarianism begin?

Say we put more laws in place and another tragedy happens. Then what? More laws? He also had explosives on him and we definitely already outlawed that....even law abiding citizens who have never even had a ticket for speeding cannot legally have them in their possession, and yet he had them.

Where is this invisible line everyone thinks exists because I personally cannot tell you where it is.

a reply to: Miracula2

Gun control only works with honest people.

Evil doers will still find a way to purchase black market weapons.

Removing ease of access can curtail knee jerk gun reactions by people caught up in the heat of the moment.

originally posted by: MonkeyFishFrog

originally posted by: neo96
The only religion relevant to the topic is Islam.

Ya know that religion that has a rich tradition of racism,bigotry, and intolerance, a horrendous track record of women's, and gay rights.

Ya know the motivation behind gunning people down in that night club.

But what do i know.

Because no Christian EVER has used Christianity to justify racism, bigotry, intolerance, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, antisemitism, or the like.

No because they are referred to as a "anti christ" and as such are not christians even though they claim it to be so. same as these daesh. Also they might be using the wrong part of the bible instead of th esection for christians called the NT.

originally posted by: Timely
This could very well be the US equivalent of Australia's Port Arthur massacre.

Although not of a muslim terror nature, it lead to the gun control we have in place today.

The statistics say this has worked. We are not gun free as many think. We do however have very strict controls and regulations regarding arms.

There is a problem with that I covered in another thread.

Australia is surrounded by an Ocean. They have ports of call where customs checks everything coming in.

As the United States, we have unprotected boarders where anything can come in..... drugs, guns, people (as in human trafficking) you name it, we can get it here by means of sneaking it across the boarders.

Also there have been several mass shootings in AUS since then, so that clearly doesn't work.


(i am agreeing with you, I just thought I would clarify for people who may not have seen my argument in the other thread)

I'm taking a break from ATS for a week or so. I will still lurk to catch up on the threads I've contributed but I need this time to gather with friends and family of victims.

Hopefully when I return, the tone here will be more or less back to normal.

Thanks again to ATS. I am so proud to be a part of this community. And a special thanks to all the users & mods who expressed their condolences to me either publicly or in a PM. It really means a lot to me to get so many thanks from strangers I've never met.

Stay strong ATS. We will meet again soon.

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

we start with common sense and go from there. terrorism will happen, we can only try and prevent it. the case im making is simple, if someone is known to have terrorist sympathies or support, they should not have the right to buy guns. guns are here to stay in the US and no one is advocating for a total ban. a common sense gun law like this could have prevented this, and should prevent further terrorism but not all. in my opinion going into a gun store and buying enough guns and ammo to kill 50 people is too easy, especially if that person is known to have terrorist ties. there is nothing in place to prevent what happened today again.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

I am so sorry for your loss! Please be safe and hold your loved ones dear.

a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

Did he actually have explosives ?
Or was a kevlar vest mistaken for such ?

If he did have explosives I would think it strange yet fortuitous that he did not detonate.

( think dead mans switch )

originally posted by: DancedWithWolves
a reply to: ElectricUniverse
Just like Dylann Roof was an extremist. This guy was likely mentally ill. His ex wife thinks he was bi polar. Doesn't appear it was ever documented or treated. He was likely homophobic like Roof was racist. No evidence that he was ISIS directed. He may have become a wanna be to justify his hatred and violence. They come in all shapes and sizes. Intolerance and hatred kills. No matter the insane reason.

Minus the fact that he called 911 and claimed he was doing it as a part of isis, or the fact that isis hs claimed responsibility, or the fact that he was muslim (was enough for me to make a judgment call when I first heard what this #ers name was). Islam is a plague on modern society. And the funny thing? I'm a pretty compassionate, loving person. I also happen to live in the real world.

originally posted by: vjr1113
a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

we start with common sense and go from there. terrorism will happen, we can only try and prevent it. the case im making is simple, if someone is known to have terrorist sympathies or support, they should not have the right to buy guns. guns are here to stay in the US and no one is advocating for a total ban. a common sense gun law like this could have prevented this, and should prevent further terrorism but not all. in my opinion going into a gun store and buying enough guns and ammo to kill 50 people is too easy, especially if that person is known to have terrorist ties. there is nothing in place to prevent what happened today again.

I definitely do not disagree with you on that. I still want to know if the gun merchant has been pulled in for questioning on his procedure. There is no evidence that he did obtain it legally other than what the media says...

Here is my other issue

Such information would not show up in a background check because both cases were closed.

ABC News

That being said. should we demonize everyone who has ever been investigated? What if they are truly innocent in the investigation? That, to me, would be like putting someone on a Pedophile list even after a 16 year old falsely accuses someone of rape and is found to be an illegitimate allegation. It does happen. So where is the line?

Now OBVIOUSLY this guy was a # face. I am not saying he should have been allowed (in my personal opinion)....but you have to know that even if he could not have obtained them legally that he clearly felt so strongly about this issue. -he gunned innocent lives down- do we really think he wouldn't have just had someone else do it?

originally posted by: Timely
a reply to: SomeDumbBroad

Did he actually have explosives ?
Or was a kevlar vest mistaken for such ?

If he did have explosives I would think it strange yet fortuitous that he did not detonate.

( think dead mans switch )

I am pretty certain they found it in his car on the way to the parade.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

I find it interesting they haven't been able to notify the family yet, which is why the name isn't released, but they told you.