What Should Have Been Done to Prevent this Mass Shooting?

With regard to this watch/no-fly list, there is currently no judicial oversight to put someone on the list. Without that oversight, you cannot legally strip someone of their constitutional rights. That is the law that prospects us all equally.

a reply to: gladtobehere

I understand your candour GTBH, but surely you realise that the patrons within the nightclub should not have been armed? It's a night club. Even assuming the absence of illegal narcotics, most of the patrons would have been legally, or worse, very drunk during the massacre, and would not have been in any fit state to fire a water pistol, leave alone an actual firearm. Hell, drunken night club attendees firing all over the place would have meant that far more than fifty people would have been shot.

a reply to: Krazysh0t


I not blaming anyone. Rear view mirrored look . NO MORE.

The internal security, as you say was there, was insufficient. Obviously. It's about the only tweak I can think of.

Potential improvement, not 'blame'. Lighten up a bit....sheesh.

I saw a report on the news this morning that all but one exit there was padlocked. Presumably to prevent people from sneaking in from outside. If this is found to be true, the massive carnage could have been significantly reduced if those doors were free to open in this emergency. And if true, then the club owners will be charged as this is a willing safety/fire regulation violation.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: nwtrucker

So you are blaming the Pulse for failing to stop this shooter because they didn't install a metal detector at their front doors? Or are you suggesting that the government mandate that all bars and nightclubs have metal detectors installed at their front doors?

Internal security 'may' have prevented this particular event.

I've already pointed out that internal security WAS helping out. An off-duty police officer working as a bouncer returned fire.

Hmm, well the shooter's father seems to want to blame the nightclub..
Orlando Gunman's dad blames nightclub security

The father of the man who shot dead 49 people at an Orlando nightclub has told Sky News the attack could have been prevented if the club had better security. Seddique Mateen said he shares the grief of the victims' families, and that religion had nothing to do with his son's actions. But he said the nightclub must share responsibility for the worst mass shooting in US history, in which 49 people were killed and 53 others injured.

Totally shocking, there is only one person to blame and that is the deranged killer who decided to take all of those lives

a reply to: nwtrucker

Lighten up? I'm merely asking questions, providing facts and evidence of the account of things, and asking follow up questions. Or are you offended that I'd want further clarification on your content lacking posts?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

What should have been done?

Obviously the bums in Congress should have, long ago, passed a law banning sale of weapons to those on the no-fly list and the terrorist watch list. And the terrorist watch list should be expanded exponentially to include everyone who's been investigated by the FBI because of corroborated threat or terrorist statements and by corroborated, I mean in the presence of 2 or more credible witnesses.

The second thing that should have been done long ago is to pass a version of the european good samaritan laws, but one that provides severe penalties to those in what's called "proximate" relationship to a mass murderer. Those in proximate relationship include people who are in close relationship to the shooter such that they knew he was a nut, or radicalized. In this case that would include at least the parents and the ex-wife. But it could also include health proffessionals, teachers, co-workers and close personal friends. The penalty for failing to report should be no less than 1 year imprisonment for every life taken and in the case where your looking at more than 10 deaths, then the death penalty should apply where its found that the failure to report was made in plain knowledge that person who failed to report.

originally posted by: gladtobehere


Ban gun free zones, seriously.

That would only work on government controlled land and property.

Pulse was a private nightclub.

Cant ban gun free zones on private property without infringement on property rights.

There property there rules.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

What Should Have Been Done to Prevent this Mass Shooting?

Remove any and all freedoms.

That "might have" prevented the shooting.

a reply to: destination now

Exactly. I can't think of many reasons to justify the Pulse having needed to have excessive security or even additional security to what they already had. If the bar is located in a decent neighborhood to not need more security than the off-duty officer that was there at the time, then it reasons that the owners probably didn't want the sight of excessive security and armed personnel ruining people's fun or making them uncomfortable. Considering this is the first attack of its type against a target like this, outside of using hindsight, how would the bar even know to prepare for an event like this?

a reply to: TonyS

Except for this little document known as the U S. Constitution, that might work. You may want to strip yourself of these protections, but do not attempt to strip me of mine without due process. Hearsay is NOT due process.

Just

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: Krazysh0t

What should have been done?

Obviously the bums in Congress should have, long ago, passed a law banning sale of weapons to those on the no-fly list and the terrorist watch list. And the terrorist watch list should be expanded exponentially to include everyone who's been investigated by the FBI because of corroborated threat or terrorist statements and by corroborated, I mean in the presence of 2 or more credible witnesses.

First, this guy was on the list for one year and cleared because they couldn't get anything to stick.

Second, what do you have to say about this?
Justice Dept. Finds Flaws in F.B.I. Terror List
7 Ways That You (Yes, You) Could End Up On A Terrorist Watch List
She got on the no-fly list because the FBI checked the wrong box

Do you REALLY think that denying an American his 2nd Amendment right just because he graced the terrorist watch list is a good idea? There isn't even federal oversight for this list; people just get thrown on it for whatever reason (even by accident as one of my links shows).

The second thing that should have been done long ago is to pass a version of the european good samaritan laws, but one that provides severe penalties to those in what's called "proximate" relationship to a mass murderer. Those in proximate relationship include people who are in close relationship to the shooter such that they knew he was a nut, or radicalized. In this case that would include at least the parents and the ex-wife. But it could also include health proffessionals, teachers, co-workers and close personal friends. The penalty for failing to report should be no less than 1 year imprisonment for every life taken and in the case where your looking at more than 10 deaths, then the death penalty should apply where its found that the failure to report was made in plain knowledge that person who failed to report.

Holy #! That is dystopian! You'd imprison even the guy's doctor just because he could have known he was radicalized? I'm sorry but I don't want to live in a country that blatantly strips freedoms like that. I cherish my due process and don't agree with stripping others of it just because I'm worried about infrequent terrorist attacks.

originally posted by: gladtobehere
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ban gun free zones, seriously. That would be a start. And encourage EVERYONE to get armed and get training. Many if not ALL of these multiple victim mass shootings occur in victim disarmament zones.

If multiple people start shooting in such a scenario, many people will get killed. You are talking Hollywood, not real life.

Is it worth 50 human lives to deport everyone who openly pledges allegiance to ISIS out of the USA?

I'm inclined to say Yes anymore these days.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Nothing. He could've used other means if he was that bent on violence. Gas can, fuel bomb. Whatever.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Is it worth 50 human lives to deport everyone who openly pledges allegiance to ISIS out of the USA?

I'm inclined to say Yes anymore these days.

So when would this guy have been deported? Sometime between calling into 911, professing his allegiance, then driving to the club to shoot it up?

ETA: Also this: Could They Really Take Away Your Citizenship?

If you were born in the US, the government can’t revoke your citizenship unless you intend to lose it.

originally posted by: jjkenobi
Is it worth 50 human lives to deport everyone who openly pledges allegiance to ISIS out of the USA?

I'm inclined to say Yes anymore these days.

Deport where?

The Orlando shooter was a USA citizen, a born and bred American.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

At this point it looks as though Islam's teachings are to blame for this and that this young man who according to his wife had gay tendencies and had also heard his father accuse him of being gay tried to gain his father's approval by killing for Allah the very people and lifestyle his father accused him of being like.

This action of his would gain a status of martyrdom for him and gain paradise for seventy of his family members and most important to him, approval from his father. He probably thought this would turn his "bad or wrong behavior" according to Islam to a plus. To him it was a win, win situation imho.

The answer you are asking for would be to educate all Muslims that Islam's teachings of killing for paradise is wrong. That they can agree to just disagree without killing anyone. That imams are thoroughly vetted for hate speech slipped into their sermons and not allowed to influence the U.S. muslims. A British imam recently spoke at a Orlando Mosque preaching to show compassion to gays by killing them. He has spoken in the U.S. several times.

Until a whole generation of re-education has been instilled I believe it would be wise to block all sensitive access to muslims such as working at nuclear facilities, chemical and nuclear education at universities, law enforcement, airport positions, etc as mass shootings is the latest method, it used to be airplanes remember? Next year it may be chemical or nuclear, etc.

Just my two cents, and oh, here's a link that's kinda interesting,

STM

www.ummah.com...

a reply to: seentoomuch

This is probably the best answer in the thread. Education. Teach moderateism. It has more or less worked for Christianity, and it can work for Islam because there are already moderate Muslims living here just fine.

Until a whole generation of re-education has been instilled I believe it would be wise to block all sensitive access to muslims such as working at nuclear facilities, chemical and nuclear education at universities, law enforcement, airport positions, etc.

This on the other hand is a bad idea and will just spawn resistance to your education. Not to mention it violates several Amendments, but at the least the 1st Amendment.

I'm not looking for answers that strip rights away. I want working solutions that can apply to everyone without infringing on liberties.