Agreed. That's the way it's always been. Leaders who twisted their holy book for gain. The Crusades etc. Islam is basically like Christianity during the Crusades.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
LGBT - Terror
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
How about we look at this from a mathematical standpoint and grasp the fact that there will ALWAYS be a very small percentage of humanity with extreme ideologies that will kill others in the name of whatever it is that they believe in? It's not about the accessibility to firearms or knives. These weapons and/or similar have been easily accessible for all of recorded humanity and will continue to be in perpetuity.
It's really about how easy it is for a group of likeminded believers to mire themselves down into a religious identity based upon a few select verses of scripture. It's way easier avoiding complete books of religion or spirituality than it is to actually read them in their entirety, and it's certainly easier on the mind to read a few passages and get passionate about those texts, than it is to embark on a journey of understanding their full context, or God forbid, actually understanding how those texts compare to other religious beliefs. My sense is that the most radical extremists are actually the ones with the least amount of scriptural knowledge. They just found some ideas that made them feel part of a group and so they ran with them full speed.
All religious teachers/theologians of all religions perhaps according to systematic studies/researchers should emphasis that some Positive verses are of the highest priority when making judgements. Such as Spirit lives and Letters kill!
While specifically should mention that some Negative verses are already outdated, due to historical context issues!
Both of these Positive and Negative verses, once agreed by individual religious councils, must be printed on the inside cover of every single printed copy of their holy books!
Relevant posters must be displayed on walls and entrance of worship places!
All schools should educate students these updates/changes!
Making it as a compulsory legislation by law makers!
The world may become safer! Perhaps much safer, and less wars!
That hopefully might help!
Just 2 cents!
Halleluja!!!!
I'm not "finally" coming around to anything. I have always been in favor of a more intense screening process for gun ownership, and have written that several times. I also believe that there should be extensive training that goes along with that ownership. I do not support banning these weapons because bans don't, and won't bring the desired results.
On the basis of what? Because he made some tasteless jokes? Either agencies find evidence or they don't. Or you also want your gun rights revoked because someone does not like your face? Harder access to certain types of firearms would have gone a much farther way...
More info:
http://www.newsmax.com/US/FBI-probe-Orlando-shooting/2016/06/12/id/733488/
The FBI first became aware of suspected Pulse Nightclub shooter Omar Mateen three years ago, when co-workers at a Florida security company where he was employed complained he made inflammatory comments to them about having potential ties with terrorists, but an interviews with Mateen then and another time were "inconclusive," FBI agent Ron Hopper said during an afternoon press conference Sunday.
"The FBI investigated, including interviews of witnesses, physical surveillance and background checks," Hopper told reporters. "In the course of the investigation Mateen was interviewed twice. We were unable to verify the substance of his comments and the investigation was closed."
And then again in 2014, Mateen, the son of immigrants from Afghanistan, once again came to the attention of the FBI, because of possible ties to an American suicide bomber, but it was determined at that time that the contact was "minimal and did not constitute a threat," Hopper said.
Meanwhile, Hopper said the FBI is still investigating reports that Mateen made calls to 911 Sunday morning, in which he stated his allegiance to Islamic State (ISIS) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi...
I have no problem if individuals like this are denied the right to purchase firearms, just to be clear.
Shocking. So next time you say something in a drunk state we shall take you seriously and revoke your citizenship and ship you out to banana land? You people utterly contradict yourself. You get all excited about 2nd Amendment and free speech but then want to revoke the same for someone having said something you don't like. Ridiculous. So are we starting the same spiel as the banned word bomb on airplanes in general society now? Thanks US for having people of the world searched for tweezers and nail cutters each time we want to board planes and thanks for microphones stuck up our asses to listen in on which words we use in the check in queue.
Instead of simply banning to society harmful and utterly useless weapons we now need to spy on our coworkers what they might or might not say. That is your idea of a free America? Wow
Instead of simply banning to society harmful and utterly useless weapons we now need to spy on our coworkers what they might or might not say. That is your idea of a free America? Wow
How's about we just start with the simple stuff. Say for instance some guy who has been in for questioning about his Radical Islamist public statements and associations with known terrorists. One would think it'd be impossible for a guy like that to purchase any weapon legally, yet here we are with just that guy purchasing weapons legally and killing scores of people. If we can't do something as straight-forward as stopping a guy who is shouting I'M A TERRORIST from purchasing guns, just how the fuck do we trust this band of idiots in government to do anything right?
Last edited:
On the basis of what? Because he made some tasteless jokes? Either agencies find evidence or they don't. Or you also want your gun rights revoked because someone does not like your face? Harder access to certain types of firearms would have gone a much farther way...
You can take people at their word or not. Sometimes they talk shit, other times not. War has been declared by certain entities. Ask yourself if the jokes made relative to those entities by the killer matters to the dead. .
Often agencies will say what is politically correct to say (or only do what is politically correct), even if there is evidence to the contrary. In fact, it seems quite common these days.
Last edited:
So what? You still can't go all rampage on 2nd amendment and free speech but deny the same to your neighbor just because he is a Muslim. Well you can but it would spell the end of what America stands for. Hardly any of the white supremacists have ever been brought in for questioning so what's the difference all of a sudden?
My point is that banning certain types of weapons is in fact one of the easiest ways among all other options) to reduce (not eradicate) such atrocities.
My point is that banning certain types of weapons is in fact one of the easiest ways among all other options) to reduce (not eradicate) such atrocities.
You can take people at their word or not. Sometimes they talk shit, other times not. War has been declared by certain entities. Ask yourself if the jokes made relative to those entities by the killer matters to the dead. .
Often agencies will say what is politically correct to say (or only do what is politically correct), even if there is evidence to the contrary. In fact, it seems quite common these days.
So what? You still can't go all rampage on 2nd amendment and free speech but deny the same to your neighbor just because he is a Muslim. Well you can but it would spell the end of what America stands for. Hardly any of the white supremacists have ever been brought in for questioning so what's the difference all of a sudden?
My point is that banning certain types of weapons is in fact one of the easiest ways among all other options) to reduce (not eradicate) such atrocities.
So if a guy jokes about being affiliated with terrorists, but really isn't, even though we are at war with said terrorists, he should still have the right to bear? Hmmm. Even if he is just joking, he's just demonstrated enough stupidity about such things to question his rationality to own firearms, IMO. And yet, everyone else should still make sacrifices because of either his possible affiliations or sympathies (self proclaimed, remember?) to those who would harm us, or his plain stupidity?
I believe in responsible ownership, regardless of capacity. I've said so a thousand times in this forum. I don't consider joking about terror, especially after events over the last several years, a responsible action, do you? And in this case, he wasn't joking.
How would you reduce or eradicate the weapons already in possession after banning them?
Last edited:
By that rational you should probably confiscate 200 million firearms that currently reside in the possession of dumb and irrational people. Good luck
So if a guy jokes about being affiliated with terrorists, but really isn't, even though we are at war with said terrorists, he should still have the right to bear? Hmmm. Even if he is just joking, he's just demonstrated enough stupidity about such things to question his rationality to own firearms, IMO. And yet, everyone else should still make sacrifices because of either his possible affiliations or sympathies (self proclaimed, remember?) to those who would harm us, or his plain stupidity?
I believe in responsible ownership, regardless of capacity. I've said so a thousand times in this forum. I don't consider joking about terror, especially after events over the last several years, a responsible action, do you? And in this case, he wasn't joking.
How would you reduce or eradicate the weapons already in possession after banning them?