Mass casualty shooting in Orlando nightclub

How the hell can you muck up this thread any worse?

 

Fine, be an asshole.

 

The fact that someone has been investigated by the FBI twice, may be on a watch list or has a history of aggressive tendencies and impolitic statements doesn't prevent him from fully exercising his constitutional rights to bear arms under the 2nd Amendment. An executive branch agency does not have the unilateral power to prevent a person from exercising their rights without, at a minimum, some due process to a hearing before the government deprives him of rights. At this point, possessing firearms is akin to voting, free speech and going to church. The government cannot just prevent you from being fully involved as a US Citizen. And this guy appears to be a natural born US citizen.

I await the United States Congress' attempt to prevent alleged terrorists from acquiring firearms, gathering to pray and spreading their ideology before they have been convicted of a crime.

 

Could we agree there should be a framework that alerts the FBI that somebody on a watch list just made a firearms purchase? Not prevent the purchase, but just lets them know one was made.

 

Guns can't do anything. Guns don't have a brain. They are literally incapable of killing anyone without someone pulling the trigger, or using it to hit someone. Besides, you missed the point of my post, completely.

 

Dan Rather's take:

As I reflect on where we are in the wake of the Orlando tragedy, I once again wish to summon the invaluable advice of the great Edward R. Murrow - "steady." Steady does not mean complacent. It does not mean cowardice, or passivity, or a lack of a resolve to act. It is to realize that action without thought is too often a road to folly and mistakes. It is to remember that tragedies, even on the scope and scale of this horror, cannot be divorced from the larger currents and contexts of our world. And it is to pray that our leaders use wisdom rather than recklessness as they weigh their response.

Beware of anyone who says there are easy answers. No law, no slogan, no single or even coordinated action can cure us of these threats to our national well being. The sheer magnitude of this event would necessitate the coverage it is getting, but the tentacles of its facts stretch into many of our most contentious debates - over guns, terrorism, and the violence to marginalized communities.

We are learning a lot more about the murderer and the attacks. There are still many questions we don't know. Rather than complete thoughts, I have sketches and questions of my own that, as a reporter, I am eager to follow. I will list them below in no particular order and wonder what you are thinking about as well.

In a free and open society such as ours, we are vulnerable to attacks like this.

We have far too many mass shootings. It is a disgrace and we should treat them as the public health crisis that they are.

Our gun laws are far too lax, but tightening them is not a panacea.

We have violent extremists around the world who wish us harm, and many cloak their bloodthirst in the Islamic faith.

We cannot repeat enough the lesson that President George Bush preached in the wake of the 9/11 attacks that the vast majority of Muslims, most importantly the millions who are loyal citizens of the United States, are our best and most important allies in combating extremism.

For all the progress the LGBT community has made in this country, it still is too marginalized by our society and lives under a constant threat of violence.

It is a shame but I guess inevitable that in an election year a tragedy like this would so quickly become the fodder for sloganeering.

Our leaders cannot just state that they have a plan. We deserve to have it outlined.

We need to understand that there may be no good answers on what should be done next, but that does not mean that we can shirk from making hard decisions on action.

This was a terrorist attack, in all senses of the word. But isn't anyone firing indiscriminately at civilians a terrorist?

What was this man's link to ISIS?

What did the FBI know about this man?

How can we do a better job of protecting ourselves against this kind of terrorist attack?

Are there useful tradeoffs to be made with our freedoms that would make us safer? Or is that a fool's errand?

Will we ever be able to disentangle his motives, and how much does it even matter?

For much of the day, I listened and read the news. But tonight I watched the Tony Awards with my wife. Obviously last night's carnage hung over the event and couldn't or shouldn't have been ignored. But as I saw so many talented artists, many members themselves of the LGBT community, I was filled with hope. As individuals made of flesh and blood, all of us are susceptible to bullets. But the spirit of our freedom, with all its expressions of the sensitivities and creativity of the human mind, cannot be so easily destroyed.

I ache for all those who suffered and continue to do so. There is a hole in our nation tonight. But if we succumb to fear and fail sound leadership, we will be a lesser nation rather than a stronger one.

These are just some of the tendrils of my thoughts. What are you thinking tonight?

 

#HotTake alert. If you agree with Bill Maher, you agree with me. If you don't, your loss.

There’s a common ground between Boko Haram, Belgium, San Bernardino, the school in Pakistan, the two attacks on Paris and the double-rampages against vacationgoers in Tunisia (Google searching “Tunisia-Massacre-2015” brings up TWO events from last year that claimed 20+ victims apiece.

The people committing these acts thought of themselves as Muslim. VERY MUSLIM. So did the people who taught them to kill (or destroy priceless ancient relics) for their hate. Someone ingrained these murderers-to-be with the idea that killing civilians – because they were children of Pakistani military officers, because they were Westerners, because they were gay, because they were Christians, because they were Jewish, because they were fellow Muslims who tolerate all the above – is a valid freedom of expression. They pulled the trigger and detonated their bombs BECAUSE of their strong religious beliefs. They believed committing mass murder made them more devout.

Unlike with any other religion, a popular/worldwide movement validates this philosophy. ISIS erased a 95-year-old border and committed genocide with the help of citizens of how many countries? This is not nearly the fringe element our president wants you to believe it is.

The bloodshed is nothing new. It’s also as old as the excuses for it. The regularity of self-professed Jihadists killing innocents is matched only by the predictable aftermath. I speak of the two tired arguments that defy reality. Hearing that (a) all religious extremists are created equal and (b) any critique of Islam for inciting violence is an insult (and racist insult) of all 1 billion Muslims is only a matter of time.

 

No. Would you submit your article is advance to the government, not for prior restraint but so they are alerted to your machinations?

We are talking about a Constiutional Right. You have as much right to that AR-15 as your neighbor has to petition the government for a redress of grievances. You can impose time, place and manner restrictions. But you couldn't require a permit that is so onerous as to deny one the right to bear arms. In the old days it would be like the government charging a 1 million tax on each printing press or printer or computer with which to create a blog or newsletter.

The Scalia Court has consistently made rulings that will ultimately cripple the country. Allowing a sitting Presdient to be sued in civil court was said to be a deminimus imposition on the ability to govern. NOT SO. Citizens United, Hobby Lobby and Heller are so coming back on the people as to utterly remake this country into a chaotic mess.

 

Only a Democrat would be dumb enough to get killed by lawn darts.

 

I fear Tony believes this meme actually happened.

 

We already have what some consider to be an onerous process for purchasing NFA weapons (aka fully-auto, silencers, shortened rifles and shotguns). You have to get your local LEO chief to sign an ATF form before you can legally take possession of it.

http://targetworld.net/Steps for buying NFA (Class III Weaponry) 11-3-07.pdf

So with some firearms purchases, innocents who aren't on any watch list at all have to get permission of the authorities before making a purchase. If we allow that to happen, why can't people flagged for investigation be in a database on NICS, then when they fill out the form and the gun shop runs it the FBI (or whoever) is alerted? Or should the NFA regulation be relaxed?

 

Hungry vampire that HRC is, her thirst for power forces her to work both sides of the street- those who sell arms globally and those who wish to disarm America.
She really will say anything to get elected.