The General Terrorist Rampage Thread

[Huber.]

So it turns the FBI knew about Cruz being dangerous. They also knew about the Boston Marathon Bombers, the NYC/NJ bomber and the San Bernadino shooters. At what point do they start seeing some blame for not doing their job?

 

[Cavatt]

Bingo: decrease probability. IMO lot of perfect is the enemy of the good logic. You can kill a lot of people with fertilizer (ala OKC bombing) but it's not easy so we just don't see many fertilizer bombs

They also changed the way you can obtain fertilizer and red flag suspicious purchases. My company uses Urea for something unconnected to agriculture and we have to answer questions about it.

 

[Cavatt]

So it turns the FBI knew about Cruz being dangerous. They also knew about the Boston Marathon Bombers, the NYC/NJ bomber and the San Bernadino shooters. At what point do they start seeing some blame for not doing their job?

The west Hollywood Duo got stopped with masks and assault weapons and rope and things that are commonly used in crimes right before they massacred a lot of people and shot up west Hollywood, but what can you do when you have to let them go? None of the people you described were doing any crimes when questioned. Do you want to broaden the FBI's powers, and how do you do that without infringing on guns rights?

Our criminal justice system really wasn't built for prevention.

 

[AZ_]

So it turns the FBI knew about Cruz being dangerous. They also knew about the Boston Marathon Bombers, the NYC/NJ bomber and the San Bernadino shooters. At what point do they start seeing some blame for not doing their job?

It's unfortunate that the FBI isn't able to prevent these people from acquiring the weapons they did before committing mass murder.

But that's the sort of the changes liberals are pushing for.

Welcome aboard.

 

[Huber.]

The west Hollywood Duo got stopped with masks and assault weapons and rope and things that are commonly used in crimes right before they massacred a lot of people and shot up west Hollywood, but what can you do when you have to let them go? None of the people you described were doing any crimes when questioned. Do you want to broaden the FBI's powers, and how do you do that without infringing on guns rights?

Our criminal justice system really wasn't built for prevention.

They knew more than that

“Folks have focused on reports,” Comey said at a media briefing in Washington, “that at least one of the killers was in contact with subjects of FBI investigations. I would urge you not to make too much of that. There were no contacts between either of the killers and subjects of our investigations that were of such significance that it raised them on to our radar screen.”

However, two different anonymous law enforcement officials told CNN that Farook was in the social circle of Sohiel Kabir, an individual who has been sentenced to 25 years in prison for his role in recruiting others for a 2012 plot to attack US soldiers in Afghanistan.

https://whowhatwhy.org/2015/12/19/san-bernardino-what-did-gov-know-about-shooters/

 

[AZ_]

They knew more than that

“Folks have focused on reports,” Comey said at a media briefing in Washington, “that at least one of the killers was in contact with subjects of FBI investigations. I would urge you not to make too much of that. There were no contacts between either of the killers and subjects of our investigations that were of such significance that it raised them on to our radar screen.”

However, two different anonymous law enforcement officials told CNN that Farook was in the social circle of Sohiel Kabir, an individual who has been sentenced to 25 years in prison for his role in recruiting others for a 2012 plot to attack US soldiers in Afghanistan.

https://whowhatwhy.org/2015/12/19/san-bernardino-what-did-gov-know-about-shooters/

The second paragraph doesn't appear to contradict what Comey said at all.

 

[Cavatt]

They knew more than that

“Folks have focused on reports,” Comey said at a media briefing in Washington, “that at least one of the killers was in contact with subjects of FBI investigations. I would urge you not to make too much of that. There were no contacts between either of the killers and subjects of our investigations that were of such significance that it raised them on to our radar screen.”

However, two different anonymous law enforcement officials told CNN that Farook was in the social circle of Sohiel Kabir, an individual who has been sentenced to 25 years in prison for his role in recruiting others for a 2012 plot to attack US soldiers in Afghanistan.

https://whowhatwhy.org/2015/12/19/san-bernardino-what-did-gov-know-about-shooters/

So, they should arrest everyone in the social circle? This is a weird situation. I know of a person who hatched a plot to kill his parents for the inheritance. The police came and talked to him and he assured them that he had no intention of doing it. Then he did it.

He hadn't broken any laws beforehand. This is the part I don't know what you are supposed to do. Law enforcement sometimes has to give people the guns back that they eventually commit the crime with.

 

[Sebastian]

The west Hollywood Duo got stopped with masks and assault weapons and rope and things that are commonly used in crimes right before they massacred a lot of people and shot up west Hollywood, but what can you do when you have to let them go? None of the people you described were doing any crimes when questioned. Do you want to broaden the FBI's powers, and how do you do that without infringing on guns rights?

Our criminal justice system really wasn't built for prevention.

No it is not. Essentially the following will keep you from buying guns:

1) Felony.
2) Certain violent misdemeanors like domestic violence.
3) Prior involuntary commitment to a psychiatric facility (there is a very high bar to commitment)

Unless the FBI charged him with a felony or violent misdemeanor, they could not have prevented him from purchasing firearms.

 

[Huber.]

It's unfortunate that the FBI isn't able to prevent these people from acquiring the weapons they did before committing mass murder.

But that's the sort of the changes liberals are pushing for.

Welcome aboard.

I would be up for immigrants not being able to purchase guns too. I don't trust the government to get final say on who is "mentally fit" to own a gun, however

 

[Hurl Bruce]

View: https://twitter.com/ABC/status/965710028702453760

 

[Mr. Orange]

I think part of the resistance to an assault weapons ban is about control and “the liberals winning”. I think the defense of Chief Wahoo was similar.

The assault weapons things is the same. Let me be clear, I think you are well within your rights to own a gun...a handgun or rifle to protect your home or to hunt. However, unless you are Scarface and involved in some real bad shit, there is no reason you need an AR-15 for protection. Also, I don’t remember hearing any stories of someone stopping an assault on their home or saving the day with their AR-15. Even @The Human Q-Tip s somewhat logical position that in the event of a military coup and oppression, an armed society and resistance could convince some soilders to join the resistance, is a bit of a fantasy. That has never occurred in America while mass shootings do daily.

Will banning assault weapons stop mass shootings? No, but it will limit the fatalities when they happen. It’s not an erosion of your rights and the left winning. It’s about your right to live in a safe society. Gun manufacturers care about profits and the pro gun politicians care about votes and staying in power.

Have an assault weapons ban, and have a sunset provision. If in 25 years, the number of mass shootings had not decreased, well then it seems like it hasn’t made a difference. If it HAS made a difference then make it permanent.

Also we need to expand mental health coverage and stop the stigma for men. This shooter was a lonely and depressed outcast. He needed to talk to someone but maybe didn’t know how or maybe he felt weak. It’s ok to admit you don’t feel happy and get help. “Manning up” is the mental health version of 1800s blood letting.

EDIT: I had a typo.

 

[BMAN]

View: https://twitter.com/ABC/status/965710028702453760

Ben Shapiro didn’t like this video

 

[Huber.]

View: https://twitter.com/ABC/status/965710028702453760

He should do that for all of his guns, put a sign in his front yard that reads "gun free zone" and see how that goes over.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

I think part of the resistance to an assault weapons ban is about control and “the liberals winning”. I think the defense of Chief Wahoo was similar.

The automatic weapons things is the same. Let me be clear, I think you are well within your rights to own a gun...a handgun or rifle to protect your home or to hunt. However, unless you are Scarface and involved in some real bad shit, there is no reason you need an AR-15 for protection.

I'm sorry, but this is the exact reason so many of "us" simply tune you guys out on gun control issues. No matter how many times the point gets made -- and I don't think it's exaggerating to say there have probably been 50 posts here making this point -- the AR-15 and "assault weapons" are not automatic weapons. They are not "machine guns". But the exact same core factual error keeps getting made.

Joe Scarborough said yesterday that the AR-15 was "more lethal" than the M-16. Statements like that get repeated, and become part of many peoples' understanding of the issue.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMAJuZav5SY


This is an extremely common misunderstanding that I think is pushed deliberately by media types and politicians who know better. They use the phrase "assault weapon", because they know that a significant percentage will infer that makes it like the automatic weapons they see in movies, etc.. If you call them on it, they'll innocently claim they didn't say it was automatic, while knowing full well that's the inference many people will draw.

ETA: The true issue is whether or not semi-automatic rifles should be banned. That is exactly how the issue should be framed for public debate. It's the most accurate, least misleading descriptor possible.

 

[AZ_]

I'm sorry, but this is the exact reason so many of "us" simply tune you guys out on gun control issues. No matter how many times the point gets made -- and I don't think it's exaggerating to say there have probably been 50 posts here making this point -- the AR-15 and "assault weapons" are not automatic weapons. They are not "machine guns". But the exact same core factual error keeps getting made.

Joe Scarborough said yesterday that the AR-15 was "more lethal" than the M-16. Statements like that get repeated, and become part of many peoples' understanding of the issue.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMAJuZav5SY


This is an extremely common misunderstanding that I think is pushed deliberately by media types and politicians who know better. They use the phrase "assault weapon", because they know that a significant percentage will infer that makes it like the automatic weapons they see in movies, etc.. If you call them on it, they'll innocently claim they didn't say it was automatic, while knowing full well that's the inference many people will draw.

I would truly hate this.

Lying repeatedly to make people believe it's real is something the Trump administration should own alone.

Pundits should not consider this an opportunity to go tit for tat.