LGBT - Terror

[Ricter]

Homophobia is but one aspect of Radical Islam. Radical Islam is the root cause.

As I said, it is a sufficient condition, but not a necessary condition.

Edit: when we were discussing Charleston, and Roof, it was suggested by someone, jem I think, that maybe the cause was not so much racism as anti-depressants. So far no suggestion it might have been anti-depressants in Orlando. Hmm. Yes, I know, we don't have all the facts yet.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Do you honestly question the proportion of killings by gun violence where assault weapons were involved but no Muslims involved vs the number of deaths where the perpetrator was a Muslim? Can't be serious.

Prohibiting an AR15 in no way undermines the Second Amendment, as the 2nd A never specified specific weapons. That one can therefore argue that all weapons should be protected makes very little sense given that many assault weapons and several manufacturers of AR15 are already banned in many states. If such ban undermined the 2nd A then it would have already been successfully challenged all the way up to and beyond the Supreme court.

You are the one throwing wild claims around. I want to see some substantiation of your claims regarding use of assault rifles. They are not widely used in crime or even gang violence, despite leftists fevered claims to the contrary. As someone who clearly knows little to nothing about guns, you probably don't understand that they are large, difficult to conceal and relatively expensive.

Arguing about Second Amendment law is unproductive because the federal courts are more like an unelected legislature now than a judicial body. I have to question why, when our society is coming apart at the seams, anyone would want to deny law-abiding citizens the most effective means to defend themselves, their homes and their families. The Supreme Court in Heller struck down DC's onerous restrictions on keeping effective home defense weapons. They didn't address rifles but the same logic applies.

 

[Ricter]

You are the one throwing wild claims around. I want to see some substantiation of your claims regarding use of assault rifles. They are not widely used in crime...

Unless the crime is mass shooting, of course, but please continue.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

So, at least based on what we know now, the FBI never substantiated any of the claims — at least enough to warrant further investigation. Thus, Mateen, is an American-born citizen convicted on no crimes, entitled to all the rights of any of law abiding American citizen. In addition, he had a concealed weapon permit in Florida. Unfortunately, there was nothing stopping him from purchasing a weapon. The ATF reported he did just that about a week before the attack at the nightclub.

...During the gun debate in the aftermath the San Bernardino terror attacks, the Washington Post legal blog The Volokh Conspiracy addressed some of these proposals and concluded proponents like Sen. Diane Feinstein were essentially asking for the power to strip Americans Constitutional Rights“Not based on a past criminal conviction or even a restraining order issued in court under a ‘preponderance of the evidence’ standard, but based just on the government’s suspicion,” Professor Eugene Volokh wrote.

Prof. Volokh ultimately concluded such a bill would almost certainly be unconstitutional, especially because the Second Amendment is an “explicitly guaranteed constitutional right.” The government should be required to do more than simply reply upon mere “suspicion and speculation as a basis for denying” one’s Second Amendment right, he concludes.

http://lawnewz.com/opinion/how-orla...o-buy-guns-despite-being-on-fbi-threat-radar/

No, Cap'n. That's the law as it now stands. Law enforcement is not able to properly enforce the law despite best efforts because of Second Amendment "purists."

That's not the issue at all. The issue is you can't deprive citizens of constitutional rights on vague allegations. It's called due process.

If you doubt why we don't trust the government to handle this wisely, consider the IRS scandal where the government clearly targeted Tea Party groups on political grounds. What's to stop them from doing the same thing with gun rights?

What we have here are progressives wanting to take away even more rights to supposedly handle the predictable result of their earlier policy failures on immigration.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Obama says no signs Orlando shooter was part of larger plot

The larger plot that this buffoon is missing calls itself ISIS, aka, Radical Islamic Terrorism.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-says-no-signs-orlando-shooter-part-larger-152730929--politics.html

 

[jem]

distorted? irrational... what the heck are you and your friend talking about.

What is irrational, is letting groups of people into our country when you know a percentage of them are terrorists and the head of homeland security said we are not able to properly screen the terrorists out. There is no law that says we have to let immigrants into our country. So lets now do it til we can properly screen.

what is irrational is blaming these mass shootings done by muslims extremists on conservatives.
There is nothing conservative about muslim terrorists.

Many would say Jem's views are distorted, but in today's US political climate it almost seems commonplace to have these opinions and irrational fears.

 

[conduit]

come on, let's at least stick to the truth. Your claim is completely unsubstantiated. Just because he claimed allegiance means nothing at all. So far this does not look like a plot either. It's too early on but so far nothing indicates that this was an act of terrorism. If anything then domestic terrorism.

 

[CaptainObvious]

come on, let's at least stick to the truth. Your claim is completely unsubstantiated. Just because he claimed allegiance means nothing at all. So far this does not look like a plot either. It's too early on but so far nothing indicates that this was an act of terrorism. If anything then domestic terrorism.

"nothing indicates that this was an act of terrorism." Congratulations. Dumbest post of the day/week/month/year for sure, and perhaps the dumbest post ever, and that's saying something considering where we're at.

 

[jem]

for those of you confused about homophobia vs islamic terrorism...

http://www.breitbart.com/national-s...m-migration-guarantees-future-radicalization/


McCarthy told listeners:

Washington is making the same noises that it always makes. It either says that this was anti-Islamic activity or it says that, since there are terrorist ties, that we must be ISIS inspired activity and I want people to understand, and it’s vitally important that they understand that ISIS is not the source by a long shot. Islam’s and particularly Sharia Law’s persecution of homosexuals which goes back over a millennium. It existed long before guns, which may be news to President Obama who seems to think guns may have caused this and that a police system that says you’re supposed to kill homosexuals is not to blame.

There are authoritative treatises of Sharia, of muslim law, that very blatantly and plainly lay out the fact that Islam’s hostility to homosexuals is scripturally based and more importantly for our present purposes is that Sharia, which is the muslim societal system. So that’s just the legal system but its basically it’s totalitarian and social project. Sharia sits basically, back in the 10th century when it was pretty much set in stone, has held that homosexuals should be killed. And not only killed, someone like Ayatollah Ali Sistani who the Bush administration regarded as one of the great moderates that it was relying on in it’s democracy project, he said that homosexuals should be killed in the worst way possible.

 

[conduit]

where is that evidence?

"nothing indicates that this was an act of terrorism." Congratulations. Dumbest post of the day/week/month/year for sure, and perhaps the dumbest post ever, and that's saying something considering where we're at.