world

California shooting rampage leaves 14 dead; 2 suspects killed in gun battle with police

245 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

245 Comments
Login to comment

The NRA wants to remind everyone to remember the important thing to keep in mind here, that the shooter's second amendment rights were not infringed.

29 ( +44 / -15 )

Another sad day in a broken country. Once again RIP victims. Condolences to their family and friends. Hats off to law enforcement for putting their lives at risk defending law abiding individuals from terrorists. Touch wood the police will find the murderers soon and they will be brought to justice.

14 ( +21 / -7 )

Not the time to be silly right now. The information is flowing as I type. This seems to be a well planned atrocity by 3 demented deviant humans who had an agenda.

THIS STUFF MUST STOP!

0 ( +9 / -9 )

Winning!

The NRA can again hold the severed heads of their gun slaughter high and rejoice for the Freedom they have created in the States!

Huzzah! The NRA has made Americans more free, more safe and more deadly than any society since the creation of civilization! USA! USA! USA!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year Everyone!

And don't forget to buy as many weapons of mass destruction as possible! Let the killing of freedom begin with you and your family this Christmas! The GOP Shia-Tea is counting on you! Expect your Brown Shirt in the mail soon!

6 ( +20 / -14 )

Yawn. Thursday. Wake me up if the turn out not to be white males.

-11 ( +4 / -15 )

The NRA had nothing to do with this. These guys are terrorists! Domestic or foreign? Reason? Legal guns or not these guys planned this and executed 14 and wounded 14. Stop making this political right now insensitive imbeciles.

-30 ( +15 / -44 )

"THIS STUFF MUST STOP!"

What are you proposing? Be careful with capitals. Some people might get the impression you actually want to see change.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

omg america is always having shooting rampages or police shooting black kids down

5 ( +17 / -12 )

The NRA had nothing to do with this. - comments

No background checks, no research, holding Legislators hostage to NRA dictates, the drumbeat of NRA PR paranoia, blaming the victims (especially the Newtown Truthers, twenty dead children's families taunted by midnight phone calls to grieving parents) and yes, the poor, poor NRA.

Boo hoo. Why can't those bad men asking for rational and specific gun regulation leave the poor profiteers of death alone to collect their blood money? Why is everyone so mean to the creators of the American Slaughter House? It's all so unfair.

16 ( +22 / -6 )

Funny how a tool designed for a specific use when used in the fashion for which it was designed achieves the designed result.

Oh, and the tool is dangerous.

6 ( +13 / -7 )

" Stop making this political right now insensitive imbeciles."

You wrote "THIS STUFF MUST STOP!". How is it going to be stopped without political action? What are you proposing?

10 ( +15 / -5 )

A mass shooting in a handicapped centre?

WTF? It does sound more like a terrorist attack than a nut(s) with a gun.

The world is going mad.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

So sad ,,,,maybe it time good people have guns too

-17 ( +9 / -26 )

Stop making this political right now insensitive imbeciles.

You're speaking of the NRA, right?

4 ( +8 / -4 )

While the blood is still on the floor, wait for the demagogues to turn this into a political talking point. "People did not do this, guns did it! Ban guns, and it won´t happen!".

So predictable.

-20 ( +10 / -30 )

Starting to become a monthly event. 1 suspect was downed by the police, hope they down the other 2 too. Preferably painfully.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

With the recent mass shootings I would be more worried about the average American vs Refugees or ISIS attacks.

RIP.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

the only way to stop this insanity is to allow states to enforce their right to the 10 admendment and allow/prohibit gun laws as they choose. The feds cant do anything except clean up and investigate the aftermath and keep stats. At this rate, any country wishing to do the US harm only has to wait it out as the citizens implode against each other over some self created nonsense until it gets to the point where they seceed and ask for outside foreign intervention. They will praise the outsiders as "getting it right" only to find that they are not on the same maturity or disciplined level as the outsiders and implode against that as well, wishing for the good old days before they created their own home brewed non sense. By then they will have 'woke up" but it will be too late as somebody else has the reigns. Will it ever get to that stage? Probably not, but some have predicted it, lets hope people will wake up and see beyond their madness and appreciate what they have instead of destroying it.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Steel Phallus Cult predictably scrape their pathetic little barrel

wait for the demagogues to turn this into a political talking point

Despite the depraved depths of this latest slaughter, we still hear the shrill People Bad, Guns Good! bleat.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

@its me

Good point; you hear about all the mega rich putting their money into causes like a cure for global warming and other distant dreamy causes, why not start with the very real but tough causes like these type of crisis? It seems the more money and fame one gets, the more disconnected from whats all around them they are.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

It's telling that every time I see another story on another shooting in the U.S. my reaction is similar (if not less) than when I read about another attack in Nigeria or Afghanistan. I've become numb to it in the same way.

All of the situations are senseless losses of life mind you and are tragedies, but I don't even care to read them or get the details because inevitably it's just the same rehash of the last one.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

All I hope for now is they get the other suspect pronto. Getting him alive may provide answers but a quick death would be better than putting him on death row for 20 years.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Massacre at a facility for disabled patients? This is a new low even for the terrorist scum...burn in hell.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Sorry, but the U.S. is crossed off my list of destinations to visit. Absolutely absurd that such acts take place with the frequency in which it is happening.

5 ( +11 / -6 )

I agree.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The local FBI official says he isn't sure whether this -- 3 people with rifles in body armor killing lots of innocent people -- is terrorism or not. Well, he should contact me. I have the answer to that one.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Another day in the US. We won't even be able to fully address it before it happens again tomorrow. But hey, cue the gun-nutters who will say this could have happened if the perpetrators used toilet brushes or lemons and not guns.

2 ( +9 / -7 )

I live an hour and a half from SB and the person above me at work lives there (commutes). Scary.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I'm all for tighter can control laws. All in for heavy fines or jail time for irresponsible gun owners or transfers. Certainly not in for a gun grab. Illegal guns will continue to do what illegal guns have always done.

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

MarkGDec. 03, 2015 - 10:04AM JST (...) and an envy of most of the world.

That was maybe true x10s years ago but this time is way behind ....

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Can't argue that Eppee.... USA still isn't anywhere near as dangerous as some posts above would like you to believe. Police do a fantastic job- this incident is proof of that. Suspects captured offsite within hours. Still early reports however a darn good job.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

I was in SB during the king riots and lock down as well. as for crime there, wasnt so bad, you had to go towards LA then it got dangerous in those days with gangs etc.

I think many in the U.S. shouldnt own guns so there should be places or states where you can go and live without that fear, and that can happen with enough engineering, anything can be done. If somebody told you to do something and you would be guarenteed a million dollars if you got it done, youd find any way to get it done, no matter the cost. Last week, what was the news about in CO? before that, we were talking about a community college in OR? Today, we are arguing about 14 dead in CA. Insane has become the new reality, so your going to have to do better than gun control. The land in SG or japan or any other 'utopian' places people in the U.S. love to point to is on the same planet that land is in the U.S. It means there are no differences except in peoples minds and laws.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Another day in the US. We won't even be able to fully address it before it happens again tomorrow. But hey, cue the gun-nutters who will say this could have happened if the perpetrators used toilet brushes or lemons and not guns.

Yeah, I get it you don't like guns and wish we didn't have the right to own them, but we do and there is nothing that will change that, no matter how many libs try to go against it. But the bigger question is,chow about addressing the real crux of the problem and that is mental illness. Why aren't people talking about that? Why not have better screenings or build new asylums to house these people indefinitely. That's what really should happen.

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

how about addressing the real crux of the problem and that is mental illness.

Are you suggesting the US should send psychiatrists to the Middle East to help 'these people'? Funny how when it's swarthy men with beards it's terrorism, and when it's (apparently) home-grown Americans, they must be mentally ill?

The BBC is reporting two suspects (one male, one female) dead at the scene, another possibly on the run.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

Cleo, this was terrorism! Motivation...TBD. Nothing would have stopped these human imposters. They have a message we've yet to see. They brutally attacked a defenseless target. The police have the suspect and 2 were killed by police. The police did a good job in making the community safe again.

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

the real crux of the problem and that is mental illness. Why aren't people talking about that? Why not have better screenings or build new asylums to house these people indefinitely. That's what really should happen

Doesn't the US not incarcerate enough of its own people already?

3 ( +6 / -3 )

@Bass4funk in Paris it were Terrorist, In the US of A anyone with grief can take up a gun and take it out on his fellow man, maybe, just maybe the easy access to guns may have to do something with that.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Yeah, I get it you don't like guns and wish we didn't have the right to own them, but we do and there is nothing that will change that, no matter how many libs try to go against it.

I'm tempted to say the same thing to conservatives about abortion, but I'd be wrong. You can change things by changing the laws. As far as guns, it won't be easy, but a reinterpretation of the 2nd Amendment (back to the original) and stricter laws would be a step in the right direction. One difference between the gun issue and the abortion issue is that one side doesn't need to make up vicious lies to make a point.

But the bigger question is,chow about addressing the real crux of the problem and that is mental illness. Why aren't people talking about that? Why not have better screenings or build new asylums to house these people indefinitely.

Mental health care services are social welfare programs. There's a certain political party in America that blocks any program that resembles socialism. It's the same party that blocks gun-control legislation. Sorry to make it political, but seriously, at some point you guys have to wake the f*** up. When is it going to be enough?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I cant help but having a certain thing sir Trump mentioned from popping into my mind

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Yeah, I get it you don't like guns and wish we didn't have the right to own them, but we do and there is nothing that will change that, no matter how many libs try to go against it.

I'm tempted to say the same thing to conservatives about abortion, but I'd be wrong. You can change things by changing the laws. As far as guns, it won't be easy, but a reinterpretation of the 2nd Amendment (back to the original) and stricter laws would be a step in the right direction. One difference between the gun issue and the abortion issue is that one side doesn't need to make up vicious lies to make a point.

But the bigger question is,chow about addressing the real crux of the problem and that is mental illness. Why aren't people talking about that? Why not have better screenings or build new asylums to house these people indefinitely.

Mental health care services are social welfare programs. There's a certain political party in America that blocks any program that resembles socialism. It's the same party that blocks gun-control legislation. Sorry to make it political, but seriously, at some point you guys have to wake up. When is it going to be enough?"

*Fixed for less vulgarity JT

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Nonsensesocommon:

" Despite the depraved depths of this latest slaughter, we still hear the shrill People Bad, Guns Good! bleat. "

Nobody said that, of course. But thanks for the strawman, and for confirming my prediction about the party political zealots.

-8 ( +4 / -12 )

Two suspects shot dead, a third person now in custody.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

the only way to stop this insanity is to allow states to enforce their right to the 10 admendment and allow/prohibit gun laws as they choose.

That's not how the Constitution works. Any state law that is found to violate the 2nd Amendment via judicial review is thereby unconstitutional; Amendment X is irrelevant in this context.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

But the bigger question is,chow about addressing the real crux of the problem and that is mental illness. Why aren't people talking about that? Why not have better screenings - comments

YOU must be joking! That would interfere with buying guns!

What a stupid idea, screenings? That might require wait periods! OR Background checks for criminal records! What a LIB!

Hey just kick in the door and take our guns. Screenings? We'll have screening when you pry the Glock from our cold dead hands. 2nd Amendment!

1 ( +4 / -3 )

But thanks for the strawman, and for confirming my prediction about the party political zealots.

I have no horse in your political race. There goes that argument. My party is humanity, in all its definitions.

Saying opposition to guns that deny our humanity is 'party political'? That's beyond sad. Get a life!

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Are you suggesting the US should send psychiatrists to the Middle East to help 'these people'?

I'm talking about the mentally challenged.

Funny how when it's swarthy men with beards it's terrorism, and when it's (apparently) home-grown Americans, they must be mentally ill?

I'm an American citizen, I care about my country men.

The BBC is reporting two suspects (one male, one female) dead at the scene, another possibly on the run.

The other two are thankfully dead. Great. The other one was arrested.

-9 ( +3 / -12 )

Another sad day in a broken country.

PT -- I think taking this one admittedly sickening event, and extending it to a whole country, is a bit of a stretch. However, I will agree that the fact that this kind of event has become "the new normal" in the states means that the minority has managed to circumvent common sense, and that is very troubling.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

I'm an American citizen, I care about my country men. - comments

But, well, not enough to, you know, advocate appropriate controls on guns.

Because, you know, like, FREEDOM!

The hypocrisy of the gun club is ghastly.

Twenty tiny children slaughtered in Newtown, Connecticut along with six of their teachers and the NRA blames the victims urging their nut balls to torture parents of dead children in their homes with nightly calls telling them it's all a conspiracy that never happened?

"I care about my countrymen", as long as they're parroting the NRA propaganda manual, page by page, chapter and verse. What a sad excuse for an American.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

I'm talking about the mentally challenged.

That reminds me of a neo-koan, which says (as I recall) 'If a troll rabble rabbles online, and no one reads it, will the troll disappear?'

2 ( +2 / -0 )

In any other developed countries laws like '2nd amendment' would have been re evaluated by the law makers. Its common old laws don't apply to modern society as they did in their times and they get either revised or annulled.

But no, in the States firearm is a huge market, and powerful gunmakers constantly lobby the congress. This is a flaw of American politics system but it seems nobody can do anything about it.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

America has no doubt been cursed by guns and can predict more tragedies in the future. It seems that Ameica is never blessed by God but guns, though people always pray May God bless America all year around. Only one solution left and makes much better for them is comprehensively strict guns control, nothing else.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

in the States firearm is a huge market, and powerful gunmakers constantly lobby the congress. This is a flaw of American politics system but it seems nobody can do anything about it

Why would they? It's not as if anyone is harmed by guns in the hands of the mentally disturbed. Imagine if guns could only be obtained by rational people without criminal records? Someone is living in fantasyland. There are no flaws in America, don't you read the papers, their exceptionalism is a major personality trait.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

What most of the posters have no idea about is strict gun controls won't stop this type of carnage. Guns are prevalent for over a century. Guns as trophies from past wars still exist yet to be found in attics garages and basements. Stealing guns from police or anywhere you can find one. Then there is the southern border.

It's much deeper than most of you realize. It's a subculture with little or no empathy. It's an entitled, disgruntled employee. It's race, it's religeon, it's nationalities. USA has it all. And I didn't even mention illegal drug use.

-8 ( +3 / -11 )

Police do a fantastic job- this incident is proof of that.

If their job is killing people dead, guilty or innocent, yeah, America's paramilitary goon squad is indeed doing a great job. But yeah, praise them when they kill a bad guy. Say "Ah shucks" when they murder innocent people.

America seriously needs to do something about its glorification of guns and violence, which is permeating all of society including the government and police and not just the militia wannabees. Its so bad that if you promote peace and/or sex you can and will get righteously verbally attacked. I have not promoted either on the street, but I bet if I did I would get physically attacked, perhaps even take a bullet to the spine like Larry Flynt.

American needs some serious introspection and action upon it. It needs to find some hobbies are something other than violent.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

"It's much deeper than most of you realize. It's a subculture with little or no empathy. It's an entitled, disgruntled employee. It's race, it's religeon, it's nationalities. USA has it all. And I didn't even mention illegal drug use"

Of course other societies don't have those issues.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Apparently, one of the suspects was named Syed Farook. Hold on to your hats: Whatever the objective background of the shooting, it will now undoubtedly be called terrorism by a certain group of Americans.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

If these sub-humans are ISIS connected.......

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

bass4funk: "But the bigger question is,chow about addressing the real crux of the problem and that is mental illness."

The only mental illness related to this tragedy is with people who think it's about mental illness and that the ease of getting guns in the US is not an issue. It was a coordinated attack with three heavily armed people -- it has nothing to do with mental illness, and hence your point is ridiculous. And why is it always about 'mental illness' when it's not suddenly a follower of Islam, or black on black violence, my friend? You sound like the wacko Ted Cruz claiming, after literally supporting people who claim that the murder of abortion doctors is a good thing, that last weeks mass shooting was done by a 'transgender leftist', to try and deflect that it was not a black person, not a Muslim, and was carried out by a person who was using right-wing rhetoric and lies about Planned Parenthood to carry out atrocities, as here we have three people (at least) using the nation's insane gun laws to carry things out, and people like yourself saying ease of getting guns is not a problem.

5 ( +10 / -5 )

The NRA wants to remind everyone to remember the important thing to keep in mind here, that the shooter's second amendment rights were not infringed.

Well as much as you anti-NRA people are posting here, you do realize that the NRA also supported Syed Farook's right to own a weapon and shoot up the place. Now for those who are so hell bent on making sure that gun owners are fully scrutinized before ownership, are you going to go the same route for people who may have entered the country from some other different place, say like the Middle East.

Why shoot up a Christmas party (religious) for a place that works with the disabled and elderly? That religion of "peace" must really have some strong rules on what to do with non-believers.

RIP for the 14 who lost their lives, and I hope that after the results of a thorough investigation, Mr. Farook's compatriots who may still be around are rounded up and dealt with according to not the way they went and shot up some disabled, but humanely.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

Maybe Rump will mock the victims like his mocking of New York Times reporter Serge Kovaleski. Hey, if Senator McCain's five years as a POW is fair game, why would the GOP Shia-Tea miss another opportunity?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

it has nothing to do with mental illness, and hence your point is ridiculous.

@smithinjapan You sure about that? From the Manson Family to the People's Temple (Jonestown) to the 911 attacks and on up to ISIS and her supporters, at home and abroad, I see a lot of people who are seriously mentally disturbed. Regardless, I sure would like to curtail such people's access to guns. I see no reason to approach this problem from one end only.

If these sub-humans are ISIS connected.......

@MarkG America should not have kicked the hornet's nest? I hope everyone can hang on to their brain and realize that we were droning, bombing and shooting missiles at ISIS with impunity long before this happened. Our pilots and drone jocks are very unlikely to suffer the blow back from that. If people really want ISIS crushed, or think aerial bombardment alone is going to do it, well, there may well be a tab to pay as we participate. But the point is, it seems to me most people supported going after ISIS despite the fact that they didn't hit us first. I didn't support it.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@jersey I think taking this one admittedly sickening event, and extending it to a whole country, is a bit of a stretch

I'll stand by my quote. As you say, these atrocities, regardless of motivation or perpetrator, have become the new normal. Firearm murders are a daily happening in the country, but large portions of the US population are unwilling to allow any discussion regarding ways to minimise gun related deaths and will use intimidation tactics to threaten those who question them. Google 'come and take it' and 'open carry.'

I'm sure there are many - millions? - of law abiding gun owners who are appalled by what's happening, but why aren't they openly looking for solutions? Why aren't they out protesting?

If the problems with gun assaults persist, and if US Americans are afraid to stand up to try to solve the problem, once again I'll say the US is broken. And that's without bringing up foreign invasions.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

"That's not how the Constitution works. Any state law that is found to violate the 2nd Amendment via judicial review is thereby unconstitutional; Amendment X is irrelevant in this context."

Thats not entirely true. There are cities within states with gun free zones, which would be, according to you, violating the constitution. States like CO and WA are asserting their 10th admendment rights and ignoring the feds when it comes to legalizing weed. The fed supposedly trumps the states according to federal law, but they are using their exercising the 10 th admendment The states could interpret the 2nd admendment as they choose and still be within its limits. "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" has many interpretations.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

One of the shooters has been identified as Syed Farook.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The NRA can again hold the severed heads of their gun slaughter high and rejoice for the Freedom they have created in the States!

What a dim-witted comment! The NRA didn't create any freedoms for Americans. Just like the second amendment didn't either. The right to bear arms and protect oneself is an inalienable right. The second amendment just makes sure that right isn't violated. And as much as I dislike the NRA, I know what they are and are not responsible for.

-9 ( +4 / -13 )

"The right to bear arms and protect oneself is an inalienable right"

The right for a country to defend itself is an inalienable right; those early defenders were an army themselves, thus they wrote that. Things have since evolved into something entirely different. Now, hasnt that hijacked phrase taken out of context created a situation where the state is in jeopardy because of armed citizens? Lincoln violated the constitution in order to preserve the union. If this continues, how can people live and work in such a warzone?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The right to bear arms and protect oneself is an inalienable right.

I don't think that word means what you think it does.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

gun control, when it will happen??

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Lincoln violated the constitution in order to preserve the union. If this continues, how can people live and work in such a warzone?

It seems that this is the main argument for those who support the revoking of Americans right to bear arms. Ok you say we are in a war zone. And you want to disarm people in the war zone so only the officials have guns. Well, as you say if Lincoln violated the Constitution (during an actual war) then why not start by rounding up those Muslims or those who may have a tendency to follow a particular brand of that religion and sending them either to Gitmo or back to their own lands? But that would be "unconstitutional" would be the cry heard from the left.

Start by addressing the issue. Let's see if Mr. Farook and the person who was shot with him had some type of beef with someone at the party and felt they needed to do something to defend their honor, or were they being driven by a "higher calling" to commit such a crime. Instead of recommending that those Americans who can legally own guns, have to give them up, why not start off with those who may be of a certain religious belief system, that has been shown to have done mass shootings in the past be denied the right to own a firearm. But again, the left would cry foul over that.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

The right to bear arms and protect oneself is an inalienable right.

I wonder what John Locke would say about the contribution of one Mr. Noidall: Life, Liberty, Estate and Guns.

Following Locke's logic, it's pretty obvious that right to bear arms conflicts with all previous three rights, at least in the US of A. It is the governments job to protect the natural rights, and to an astute observer, this is not happening. Logical solution would be strict gun control, which not only protects the three first natural laws of Locke, but also protects Mr. Noidall's clever fourth one.

Or, overthrow the government, but you know, that's just Locke.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Instead of recommending that those Americans who can legally own guns, have to give them up

We still don't know if the shooters' guns were legal or not.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Laguna:

" Apparently, one of the suspects was named Syed Farook. Hold on to your hats: Whatever the objective background of the shooting, it will now undoubtedly be called terrorism by a certain group of Americans. "

Try the other way around: If it turns out that a particular religion has anything to do with this (which we don´t know at this point), the mainstream media & your government will make sure that is downplayed as much as they can. Remember Obama filing the Fort Hood shooting as a "workplace incident"?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Thats not entirely true. There are cities within states with gun free zones, which would be, according to you, violating the constitution

No, that's not according to me. What I said was that the 10th Amendment is not a trump card over the 2nd: "any state law that is found to violate the 2nd Amendment via judicial review is thereby unconstitutional."

The states could interpret the 2nd admendment as they choose and still be within its limits

Nope. The law of the land is the Constitution, the ultimate arbiter of which is SCOTUS--not the states.

Can you have gun-free zones? Yes. Can you have laws that prevent law-abiding citizens in a city or state from possessing firearms? No. Look at the D.C. handgun ban (overruled by SCOTUS).

This idea of yours of there being "places or states where you can go and live without [the fear of guns]", would unfortunately be another example of an unconstitutional law. Again, Amendment X is irrelevant here.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

One suspect is named as Sayed Farook, and he's a Muslim, his father says. However, the CNN talking heads are trying to think up theories by which his religion has nothing to do with it. Mental illness, workplace anger, that kind of thing.

The attack has many of the hallmarks of the 2 Paris incidents and Mumbai, I noticed from the start. Several gun people working in a team with assault rifles hitting "soft targets." The parallel is obvious to me, but an expert who knows more than I do is continuing on about mental illness on CNN.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

@alphaape,

I agree/disagree somewhat with the logic of one of your points and that may come across as contradictory but this is a complex situation. Truman (or was it FDR?) found it in the nations interest to camp the Japanese due to the rampant black dragon society and other subversion that was rumored (I personally believe that was true). It was latter found to be unconstitutional, but in order to protect the union, he violated their civil rights. I also do not understand why in the communities you mention, they are always first to come out and condemn the acts, but at the same time appear to condone them by not doing anything. Deporting will cause further alienation, but I can understand the logic of some measures when all other progressive alternatives been explored. I dont think its the best one...yet...but its going to require some really creative solutions to this mess, including backing up and exploring how it got to this point.

While it may appear to you that I said all Americans should be disarmed, I did not say that. Thats a very polarized and ignorant solution that would never work, even in the event of a total collaspe. What I suggested is that the states should be allowed to decided theirown interpretation of the 2nd, (with the supreme courts final judgement). If a state or county makes its so prohibitive to own and use guns that nobody does and that becomes the status quo, then I prefer to live and do business there. If a state prefers its citizens to be armed and have shoot outs, then you can live there.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The attack has many of the hallmarks of the 2 Paris incidents and Mumbai, I noticed from the start. Several gun people working in a team with assault rifles hitting "soft targets." The parallel is obvious to me, but an expert who knows more than I do is continuing on about mental illness on CNN.

One shooter was a former employee.

So there's that...

World is a scary place right now, but don't let the terrorists win. OK?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

ISIS is of course celebrating but surprisingly hasn't taken explicit responsibility for today's slaughter as they did with those previous attacks.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

World is a scary place right now, but don't let the terrorists win. OK?

They've already won.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

"One suspect is named as Sayed Farook, and he's a Muslim, his father says. However, the CNN talking heads are trying to think up theories by which his religion has nothing to do with it. Mental illness, workplace anger, that kind of thing."

Farook's name was released via social media as the news agencies did not want to release it for fear of increasing Islamophobia. And I couldn't agree with you more on one point and disagree with you more on another; 1.) I agree,this attack on soft targets is very similar to the one in France and 2.)I disagree, most of the "experts" on CNN and other news agencies have an agenda and probably know much less than you.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

In any other developed countries laws like '2nd amendment' would have been re evaluated by the law makers. Its common old laws don't apply to modern society as they did in their times and they get either revised or annulled.

Good point. But a special aspect of the 2nd amendment is that it allows citizens to defend themselves against the government, against a situation in which there is an usurpation resulting in a tyrant or dictator, a military coup d'etat, etc.

Having the government abolish the 2nd amendment opens the doors for an oppressive regime. As an example of why the 2nd is necessary, look at the black panthers in the 60's. They were able to defend themselves againts police brutality by arming themselves and policing the police. Now look at recent times, the police in the US are out of control, and the courts refuse to indict murdurous cops. If citizens arm themselves like the black panthers did, they can start policing the police again, which the authorities charged to do so now willingly shirk.

Also, has it not dawned on anyone, that the targets of these mass shootings are people whom the perpetrators expect to be unarmed: children at school, people at an abortion clinic, church goers, the mentally disabled? None of them attack those whom they know might be armed.

Also, it sickens me to watch the Europeans, and Austrailians here use these tragedies to clothe their deep-seated anti-Americanism, and to use this time to shoot off at the mouth their biased political views.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

@samwatters

I disagree, most of the "experts" on CNN and other news agencies have an agenda and probably know much less than you

i dont know about that; all the 'expert panel guest" on CNN initially said it was terror related. Didnt seem that way to me at all.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

I don't think that word means what you think it does.

Tell me what I'm missing then!

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Sortry, a surname does NOT indicate the faith of said person.

He could have been a chridyisn, Hindu, Buddhist or whatever.

Don't excuse his actions but were they really motivated by his religion or other factors?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Truman (or was it FDR?) found it in the nations interest to camp the Japanese

@ Spetals: It was FDR, Truman took over after he died.

I am not going to be the one who calls for the round up of Muslims and put them into camps, as those on the left would like to do with people who don't agree with their philosophy (just look up the many learned individuals who think it would be a good thing to charge and commit people who deny climate change). But I will say that a solid look needs to be done on those Mosques just like the FBI did with infiltrating the KKK and other supremacist groups to find out what is going on, and individuals who have the potential to commit terror need even closer attention.

But as some have posted, now that the identity of the shooters is known, and that he worked there we will get the "work place violence" or that he felt threatened since they were giving a Christmas party and didn't take into consideration of his religious beliefs. After all, his own father said that he was a devout Muslim.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Having the government abolish the 2nd amendment opens the doors for an oppressive regime.

Ever looked at the size of the US military? If the government wants to oppress the people, they will do it, and no amount of citizen guns will stop it. This argument against gun control is ridiculous.

2 ( +9 / -7 )

"but don't let the terrorists win. OK?"

Indeed, denial is always the best approach. If there's a connecting thread, then cut it.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Instead of recommending that those Americans who can legally own guns, have to give them up, why not start off with those who may be of a certain religious belief system, that has been shown to have done mass shootings in the past be denied the right to own a firearm. But again, the left would cry foul over that.

As well they should. The vast majority of mass shootings are perpetrated by white males, most of whom are (or were) Christian. Or do you mean to suggest that fundamentalists of any religion should be barred from owning weapons? (I'd be up for that but am well aware it would be DOA.)

Remember Obama filing the Fort Hood shooting as a "workplace incident"?

You had to go back six years to find an appropriate example, did you? You might have just gone back two days. And it wasn't just Obama who opined so; look to Wikipedia for more debate on what triggered Hasan, including "An analyst of terror investigations, Carl Tobias, opined that the attack did not fit the profile of terrorism, and was more similar to the Virginia Tech massacre, committed by a student believed to be severely mentally ill."

As I mentioned in my first comment this morning, if the perpetrators of this incident had been white, it would have been brushed under the carpet; since (at least one) was not, we're in for weeks of debate about terrorism. Not that it wasn't terrorism - but either way, the dead don't care.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Tell me what I'm missing then!

Inalienable right:

Natural rights are those not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of any particular culture or government, and therefore universal and inalienable (i.e., rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws).

Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_right

Guns are definitely not an inalienable right.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

I consider myself a bit progressive and multicultural, but that doesnt mean I disagree with everything FDR did or even gitmo; its a battle of ideas and beliefs. Some people, no matter how much freedom and opportunity you put in front of them, will reject it and want to replace your beliefs with theirs. When those principles are in danger of being wiped out and replaced, then measures are taken to get things back in order.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

"Sortry, a surname does NOT indicate the faith of said person"

Then care to want to explain why the California chapter of CAIR trotted out farook's brother-in-law before the cameras? Think they'd do that if the attacker was Amish?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Heh . . . this dude was a muslim. Scary, I used to rent an apartment in Redlands, which is near San Bernardino, way-way back. Nice town. Same cannot be said of San Bernardino.

Even more reason to block the refugees from enterring the US. Even the (terrorist committing the murders in this incident, Syed Farook) family is saying they had no idea why he did it. Adding that he was very religious.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/12030481/Syed-Farook-what-we-know-about-the-San-Bernardino-gunman.html

http://www.sbsun.com/

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

JeffLee:

" The attack has many of the hallmarks of the 2 Paris incidents and Mumbai, I noticed from the start. "

Really? I don´t think so. Paris and Mumbai had carefully selected targets (cultural and Jewish); not some non-descript health center. And what about the running away? I don´t really see the hallmarks of martyrs looking for paradise here.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Ever looked at the size of the US military? If the government wants to oppress the people, they will do it, and no amount of citizen guns will stop it. This argument against gun control is ridiculous.

No it's not ridiculous. You're right, the military is big. But better to be able to defend myself than stand around with my hands in my pocket. And the military is not bigger than the citizenry. And a large portion of pro-gun advocates are ex-military. They know, unlike yourself, that the world doesn't revolve around the song kumbaya.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

From my surname you couldn't figure out that I was Lutheran Protestant, Catholic or Jewish.

Granted I was raisedbas a protestant but left the church at age 14 as I didn't agree with their history or practice,, now I am Buddhist which has NO gods.

Like I said name does not indicate faith as our members globally are an indicator.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Back on topic please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

These illegal guns you speak of. ..where did they originate?

Smuggled in from overseas? Manufactured in a back yard?

Or were the vast majority stolen from regular people who had bought them legally?

It's the latter isn't it...still it's not as if you can just stop selling guns us it? I mean...how would that work.?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Just saw cnn where jarrod burguan police chief In san bernandino, california gave a update on the situation. Just before his announcement I can see him and several other police officers in uniform and officials in suits and ties laughing until they found themselves on live camera when they got serious and stopped laughing. WTF. Just goes to show you that cops In the usa are dirt bags and dont respect the severity of the situation or the victims just like the problem in Chicago. Just a bunch of cheap actors pretending to give a s**t.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Mr. Noidall,

But a special aspect of the 2nd amendment is that it allows citizens to defend themselves against the government, against a situation in which there is an usurpation resulting in a tyrant or dictator, a military coup d'etat, etc.

The 2nd amendment also specifically refers to a "well regulated militia." I don't see anything regulated or militia-like in any of the shooters. If you think the current situation in America is anything close to what the founding fathers had in mind, you're either dim-witted or dishonest. They were actually really smart guys. You might even say they were elite.

The fact is, a very strict interpretation of the 2nd amendment was upheld up until the 1970s. That's right around the time a new kind of very influential conservatives hijacked the NRA and the Republican party, and convinced the Supreme Court to reinterpret the amendment. Stricter gun laws today would only require a return to the original, and most likely intended, interpretation of the 2nd amendment.

And honestly, if you think a civilian army can take on the US government at this point, you're completely delusional. If you're really so worried about a tyrannical government, a more realistic step to take would be to stop voting for politicians that are bought and paid for by tyrannical corporations.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good Bad StrangerlandDEC. 03, 2015 - 03:03PM JST Tell me what I'm missing then!Inalienable right: Natural rights are those not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of any particular culture or government, and therefore universal and inalienable (i.e., rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws). Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_right Guns are definitely not an inalienable right.

Exactly!! The right to defend oneself is not dependent upon human laws. Therefore the right to bear arms is not granted by the second amendment.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The right to defend oneself is not dependent upon human laws.

No, but the right to have guns is. So no, it's not an inalienable right.

0 ( +7 / -7 )

And honestly, if you think a civilian army can take on the US government at this point, you're completely delusional. If you're really so worried about a tyrannical government, a more realistic step to take would be to stop voting for politicians that are bought

Are you really that blind? Do you not see what's happening with these governments around the world? Rights are being stripped left and right all in the name of safety. And you want to be a sheep when all your rights are gone? And yes, a civilian army could take on the the US government. What do you think is happening in the Middle East? Half the recruits of the taliban and ISIS are civilians. And they're wreaking havoc on the US government.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Interesting that the police chief on cnn and other officials in suits and ties are seen laughing before they are aware they are on live camera. You have to ask yourself what those clowns are thinking. Cops in the USA are overpaid, undertrained and think they are above the law that they have pledged to uphold.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

No, but the right to have guns is. So no, it's not an inalienable right.

Your argument is circular and running out of momentum. Yeah, you go ahead and fling stones while someone is shooting at you with a gun.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Hawkeye DEC. 03, 2015 - 03:24PM JST

Sense at last!

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

President Barack Obama was briefed on the attack by his homeland security adviser. He said it was too early to know the shooters’ motives but urged the country to take steps to reduce mass shootings

How about reducing the the number of islamic refugees who are set to come into (having the potential to carry out mas shootings on US citizens like this islamic terrorists) to zero.

Sure obama was briefed on this attack by his homeland security. But he still won't budge on the refugee issue. Its nonsense. Meanwhile there will be at least 14 families without their loved one this Christmas.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Your argument is circular and running out of momentum. Yeah, you go ahead and fling stones while someone is shooting at you with a gun.

None of that has anything to do with whether or not the right to own guns is inalienable. And the 'right' is alienable - which is why you only see it in uncivilized countries.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

It's sooooo ironic that Japanese are grateful to the United States for putting into effect the postwar law banning gun ownership. That's right -- guns were much easier to obtain in Japan before the war. It was the US military occupation that disarmed not only the military, but civilians as well. When they finally got around to debating a new statute in 1958, the Diet decided that the law imposed by Americans restricting firearms ownership was working fine, and kept it virtually as-is. The "right to bear arms" was not debated in the Diet and was passed by simple voice vote, without a single vote of opposition. Fewer people will die from firearms homicides in Japan in all of 2015 than did Californians in San Bernadino on Dec. 2.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Most of you screaming for gun control don't even know the half. The problem with guns in America doesn't sit squarely with the 2nd amendment. It sits with the US military- industrial complex. The US over spends on the military and weapons. Half of these military- grade weapons are siphoned off and sold illegally by the very people who are supposed to serve and protect. True the US has a crisis, but it's not necessarily the fault of the second amendment.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

How about reducing the the number of islamic refugees who are set to come into (having the potential to carry out mas shootings on US citizens like this islamic terrorists) to zero.

Or how about reducing the number of guns to zero. That would result in a whole lot less deaths than anything to do with Islamic anyone.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

True the US has a crisis, but it's not necessarily the fault of the second amendment.

But it's the 2nd amendment that empowers the NRA and other lobbying groups and the military-industrial complex.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

None of that has anything to do with whether or not the right to own guns is inalienable. And the 'right' is alienable - which is why you only see it in uncivilized countries.

You're just expressing a personal, a.k.a., biased opinion.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Just once I'd like to read gunman walks in on an NRA meeting I'd be curious how it went down and if any of the members felt different afterwards

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Yawn. Thursday. Wake me up if the turn out not to be white males.

Sorry if the mass murder of 14 innocent civilians is dreary. I wonder what you need to get you interested.

Oh, I see, you want a non-white non-male element to the story. I hoe the murderers took account of your needs.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

MrNoidea Half of these military- grade weapons are siphoned off and sold illegally by the very people who are supposed to serve and protect.

Please provide a source.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

From the editorial in today's Los Angeles Times: This nation's infatuation with guns — inflamed by the ludicrous stances of the NRA, and abetted by Congress' fear of that powerful but irresponsible group — is suicidal. There are too many guns, too easily obtained. Often they are in the hands of those who should not have them at all, such as the mentally ill.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

This Syed Farook guy though, and the other two were a tiny sleeper cell wreaking some pre-holiday havoc. This is why we must stop the islamic refugees from entering the US.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

"And what about the running away? I don´t really see the hallmarks of martyrs looking for paradise here."

Then you are blind. Paris attacker Salah Abdeslam is believed to have fled to Syria, eluding an elaborate dragnet. But the French cops don't know is exact location....because uummm he ran away.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Some news sources saying 17 dead. This is a very high death toll for a typical 'shooting rampage'.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I know that it was the gunmen who killed these people. But I can't help but blame all of those who continually support hand guns and assault rifles. It is your insistence on a person's right to bear arms, soley for the pupose of killing human beings, that is contributing to these mass shootings. You are an accessory to the loss of these people's lives.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The female has now been identified as Tayyeep Bin Ardogan, originally from Qatar.

Time for total meltdown in U.S. lib-land as they try to find a way to spin this massacre without making Muslims the bad guys.

Good luck with that . . . .

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

How about reducing the the number of islamic refugees who are set to come into (having the potential to carry out mas shootings on US citizens like this islamic terrorists) to zero.

What does this have to do with Islamic refugees? The guy was a Muslim, but he was an American citizen. He graduated from La Sierra High School in 2003. You want to reduce the number of high school graduates in the US to zero as well? It also fails to address all those other mass shootings this year in the US that weren't by Islamic refugees. Seems the refugees are more IN danger in the US than they are a danger TO the US. But they probably far prefer the relatively lower chance of being shot by some homegrown US gun nut than they do of being gassed by the Syrian government or bombed by the US, Russians, French and UK while dodging the beheading-happy ISIS guys.

Stinks to be a refugee, huh? No place to go and people making strange connections between your plight and their racist need to other.

Sure obama was briefed on this attack by his homeland security. But he still won't budge on the refugee issue. Its nonsense. Meanwhile there will be at least 14 families without their loved one this Christmas.

None of whom lost any family members to refugees. Strange you should mention Christmas as well. That story has a couple of people from the Middle East looking for a place to stay, too.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Just once I'd like to read gunman walks in on an NRA meeting I'd be curious how it went down

Heh, the NRA guys would smell something like that a mile away and the perp would be gunned down. Just like the two islamic extremist who went to Texas, tried to shoot up a cartoon contest of the prophet Muhammed.

Besides, why target the NRA? They don't shoot up Christmas Parties. Fanatical, islamic extremists on the other hand are trying to get into "heaven". Let's not condone this, but lets condone the NRA? Nonsense.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Time for total meltdown in U.S. lib-land as they try to find a way to spin this massacre without making Muslims the bad guys.

Like the Right-wing spin claiming the Planned Parenthood shooting had nothing to do with their lies and rhetoric? You're not going to see it. Libs are against radical Muslims too. Where does this notion that they support them come from?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The only mental illness related to this tragedy is with people who think it's about mental illness and that the ease of getting guns in the US is not an issue.

Stop politicizing the issue. Reports are already out that the perpetrator were Muslims.

It was a coordinated attack with three heavily armed people -- it has nothing to do with mental illness, and hence your point is ridiculous.

The reason I said that was it seemed like a very high possibility that the person by the first reports could have, again, could have been a deranged lunatic, but we now know who was responsible. What we need to know is, what was the motive.

And why is it always about 'mental illness' when it's not suddenly a follower of Islam, or black on black violence, my friend?

Well, it seems like it was radical Islam once again.

You sound like the wacko Ted Cruz claiming, after literally supporting people who claim that the murder of abortion doctors is a good thing,

He did not say it's a good thing, please stop fabricating stories.

that last weeks mass shooting was done by a 'transgender leftist', to try and deflect that it was not a black person, not a Muslim, and was carried out by a person who was using right-wing rhetoric and lies about Planned Parenthood to carry out atrocities, as here we have three people (at least) using the nation's insane gun laws to carry things out, and people like yourself saying ease of getting guns is not a problem.

Ok, so instead of blaming the perpetrators, here we go again and the left nutty statement the only way we can stop all this mayhem is by taking the guns away and I submit to you, that we already have strict laws in California, it more than enough. If you really want to blame someone, then how about blaming the people that started this crime spree, that's where the blame should go to.

I really want to know where these people got the guns from.

Or how about reducing the number of guns to zero.

How about building more mental asylums to house the mentally challenged and NOT punish any law-abiding citizen that has the right to own and carry a firearm.

That would result in a whole lot less deaths than anything to do with Islamic anyone.

Worked out so well in France and Spain.... There is a reason why the large Muslim population in Texas are so very quiet. They have radicals there without a doubt, but to try and do something crazy in that states is pure suicidal and they're not going to take that chance, because they know those people are armed.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

maxjapank:

" I know that it was the gunmen who killed these people. But I can't help but blame all of those who continually support hand guns and assault rifles. "

Err.... like the French, whose gun laws are to blame for the Paris massacres and the attempted on at the Eurostar recently, according to your logic? Do you seriously think a new law will stop those who are determined to go on a rampage, especially in a country that is already awash with weapons?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

@Tex Time for total meltdown in U.S. lib-land as they try to find a way to spin this massacre without making Muslims the bad guys.

The Muslims who committed this massacre were bad guys. The Muslims who didn't commit this, i.e. roughly 1.5 billion people, those Muslims who went about their daily business just like I did today, those who want to live a life of peace just like I am able to do while living in Japan where guns are not easily available, were most likely appalled by the atrocity.

What those Muslim bad guys possessed and used were automatic weapons. Why does a citizen of the US need an automatic weapon? Do they hate their government so much that they want to be able to overpower it? If so, if they think they can overpower the most powerful military ever, then they should be seen as mentally incapable of handling a weapon more powerful than a water pistol. Maybe these Muslim terrorists were part of an armed militia, which I understand is a justification for citizens possessing weapons.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

The shooters exercised inalienable 2nd Amendment rights to form a well-regulated militia and bear arms.

As American as apple pie.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Why do all those Syrians want to immigrate from one war zone to another?

4 ( +7 / -3 )

"It doesn't matter if (Farook) graduated HS in US or was an American Citizen. His ultimate loyalty was to islam's war against the west."

Exactly. Add to that, his accomplice was born in Qatar. If this massacre was at the hands of a Muslim born in America, just imagine the carnage that will (not if) happen should thousands of Middle East "refugees" were let loose in this country . . . .

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

Not a lot else you can say about this really... another day in the Wild West.

RIP to those who were killed...

2 ( +4 / -2 )

If it wasn't so tragic, you might think this was a parody. It has elements of the angry postal worker, Islamic terrorists, and Bonnie and Clyde.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

As I said, the predictable polical spin is on....

PTownsend:

" The Muslims who committed this massacre were bad guys. The Muslims who didn't commit this, i.e. roughly 1.5 billion people,... (snip) "

Well, neither did the 300 million Americans who did not commit the recent abortion clinic shoot-up do that. Why do we never hear this numbers excuse when you try to pin the blame on some perceived conservative? Funny thing about ideology.

" What those Muslim bad guys possessed and used were automatic weapons. "

So did "those muslim" in Paris, in spite of French gun laws. Meanwhile, in Japan, Professor Igarashi whose crime was translating the Satanic Verses, was murdered with a knife... quite without guns.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

@PT

Got to give you Japanese credit for denying Middle East "refugees" to relocate into your country. Wish the same could be said about my nation's leadership. . . .

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Time for total meltdown in U.S. lib-land as they try to find a way to spin this massacre without making Muslims the bad guys.

Muslims aren't the bad guys. These guys were bad. Unless they've somehow been elected as representatives of 1.5 billion people in the world, then their actions can't logically be held to determine the rest of those 1.499999997 billion muslims as being bad guys.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Why does a citizen of the US need an automatic weapon?

Depends, the reason is irrelevant, but more importantly, we can and we have that right.

Do they hate their government so much that they want to be able to overpower it?

Wisconsin alone has 638,000 registered gun owners, that's not a big state, of these people really wanted to do something so stupid as to take over the government, it would have happened within the last 7 years, it didn't. No one is that stupid. The majority of gun owners are not crazed loons as liberals hope and want to desperately paint that picture, they are law-abiding citizens.

If so, if they think they can overpower the most powerful military ever, then they should be seen as mentally incapable of handling a weapon more powerful than a water pistol.

My God, what on Earth are you talking about?

Maybe these Muslim terrorists were part of an armed militia, which I understand is a justification for citizens possessing weapons.

Or maybe they were from a larger radical Jihadi terrorist cell that purposely wanted to create mayhem and carnage in the name of Sharia and the caliphate.

Got to give you Japanese credit for denying Middle East "refugees" to relocate into your country. Wish the same could be said about my nation's leadership.

Since 2008 we haven't had any leadership whatsoever.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

@Tex Got to give you Japanese credit for denying Middle East "refugees" to relocate into your country

Actually I give the Japanese credit for lots of things. One of the reasons I feel safe here is knowing when I go out, even in a huge city like Tokyo, there is scant likelihood of a whacko with an automatic weapon ready to use it for whatever whack reason.

@Willi I'm fully aware that 300 M US Americans didn't commit the abortion shootout and would never say that: a whacko with a firearm did.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

WilliB: "Well, neither did the 300 million Americans who did not commit the recent abortion clinic shoot-up do that. Why do we never hear this numbers excuse when you try to pin the blame on some perceived conservative? Funny thing about ideology."

Funny thing about that -- most people who called the nutter five days ago an anti-abortionist and espousing Republican views were doing so in response to Republicans ALWAYS blaming all things Muslim or Black when its one of them who commits a crime, as suddenly people have started to do here, yourself included, once it was revealed that they might have Muslim sounding names. Until then, and about last week, you guys and pro-life presidential candidates were calling it the work of "crazed individuals", and lest we forget, in the words of bass4funk, this very problem is "mental illness", is it not?

But you guys are just thanking god they weren't white Christians, right? I know Faux News is.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

It's still a weird target for terrorism, if that is the motive. I had just assumed that it was a homegrown crazy person.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Cleo says:

Are you suggesting the US should send psychiatrists to the Middle East to help 'these people'? Funny how when it's swarthy men with beards it's terrorism, and when it's (apparently) home-grown Americans, they must be mentally ill?

Cleo, Are you saying it is impossible for a person to be mentally ill AND a terrorist? I think you need to add a third category there. Mentally ill terrorist. I think the white guy that recently killed a few people in Colorado would fit that description. The guy was clearly not right mentally. Whether that totally explains his motive for what he did, I don't know, but it's clearly not as black and white as you are trying to make it.

Besides, why do you think these people are "home-grown Americans"? What does that mean anyway?

Does it mean you think they are white? Any more, being a home grown American says nothing about their skin color. They could be black, Asian, white, or Latino and still be home-grown American. It is likely these people were Muslim terrorists from the reports I have heard. I suspect it is the radical Islam teaching they bought into that influenced them and had nothing to do with their upbringing as an American. They are home-grown radical Islamists who committed an act of terrorism.

Your post is out of line! You are jumping to false conclusions.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@Bass If so, if they think they can overpower the most powerful military ever, then they should be seen as mentally incapable of handling a weapon more powerful than a water pistol. My God, what on Earth are you talking about?

An earlier poster wrote:

Good point. But a special aspect of the 2nd amendment is that it allows citizens to defend themselves against the government, against a situation in which there is an usurpation resulting in a tyrant or dictator, a military coup d'etat, etc.

I've read a number of posters use that line of - I hate to use the word in this case - reasoning. I call that whack. Guns for hunting and protection, wanting to target practice, OK, to each his own. But to overtake the government with a militia? Flat out whack. Automatic weapons in the hands of citizens (authorised or not), flat out whack.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Smithja:

" Funny thing about that -- most people who called the nutter five days ago an anti-abortionist and espousing Republican views were doing so in response to Republicans ALWAYS blaming all things Muslim "

Oh, now we are discussing if the chicken or the egg came first? Seriously? How about cutting out that partisan nonsense and being consistent for a change?

You are on recorder for ALWAYS talking about ideology only when you can blame "republicans" or some other pet peeve of yours, but NEVER about ideology when it is e.g. islamist radicals. So hard to see the double standards?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Well, neither did the 300 million Americans who did not commit the recent abortion clinic shoot-up do that. Why do we never hear this numbers excuse when you try to pin the blame on some perceived conservative? Funny thing about ideology.

The point people were making when pointing out that the nutter with the planned parenthood clinic was a Christian terrorist, was that so many people blame all Muslims when it's a Muslim terrorist, but don't blame all Christians when it's a Christian terrorist. It's a double standard. If it's a Christian, or a white guy, it's not representative of the entire group, but when it's a Muslim it is.

You're complaining about the reverse of that, so you obviously understand the concept. So which is it, is one Muslim/Christian/white guy representative of the entire group, or are they individual nutters? What's good for any one of those groups is good for all of them, so no splitting up which race/religion the rule applies to. What is the rule? Let's apply it to all the groups.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

The reality is Islamist terrorism & other violent acts are on the rise. Besides military measures, Governments should take strict legal measures to ensure greater public safety:

Scrutiny & jailing of "violence" professed religious leaders. Internet violence promoters be arrested and charged in courts. Internet depiction of making of weapons of destruction be deemed illegal. Actual profiling of terrorists & dissemination of information. Strict heavy jail sentences including caning. (Terrorists are not afraid of death but pain). Much stricter and greater gun control. Internet service providers are made responsible for curbing violence promotion in their websites. Greater border and immigration checks. EU cannot have free porous borders, but checks especially on profiled groups are necessary.

Don't be naïve. Gentlemanly discussions don't apply to terrorists.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Another banner day for the NRA and the[ f]right to bear arms. The U.S. needs gun control. The NRA does not own the U.S. It can be beat.

The question that is bugging everyone is why pick on a center that cares for children with disabilities? This attack by a husband and wife dressed in military outfits and with semi-automatic weapons on disabled children is not only cruel and gratuitous, it is also incomprehensibly weird.

Who is next to be slaughtered?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

The gun nutters will make sure nothing changes. Just bury them, grieve, and move on.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

tjguy - I'm jumping to no conclusions, false or otherwise, neither am I trying to make anything black-and-white. My post was addressed to bass4funk, who likes to tell us that the problem in America with mass shootings lies not with the guns with which society is awash, but with hordes of people who need to be put in mental institutions in order to keep other Americans safe from being shot by loonies. It's an opinion he's expressed numerous times.

I was asking him to confirm that in this instance too, the problem is (in his view) one of mental illness.

Since then more information regarding the perpetrators has come to light, and it seems he has decided they are part of a larger radical Jihadi terrorist cell that purposely wanted to create mayhem and carnage in the name of Sharia and the caliphate. If they'd turned out to be white right-wingers, I have no doubt he'd be making excuses - probably saying it was Obama's fault.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The gun nutters will make sure nothing changes.

Why are we blaming guns? Let's blame the real culprits- the extremists already in the US (like this guy and the other one from Quatar) and the other trying to come her to commit these atrocities on innocent civilians.

Just bury them, grieve, and move on.

What a sickening statement. Yeah and I'm sure Jihadi John's buddies in Raaqa are just crying their hearts out for these victims too.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Cleo:

" Since then more information regarding the perpetrators has come to light, and it seems he has decided they are part of a larger radical Jihadi terrorist cell that purposely wanted to create mayhem and carnage in the name of Sharia and the caliphate. If they'd turned out to be white right-wingers, I have no doubt he'd be making excuses - probably saying it was Obama's fault. "

Well, in the event it is now your turn to make the usual excuses. Like the usual strawman that 1,5 billion muslims did not do that, that powerty/discrimination/israel (take your pick) made them do it, that every religion has their own jihadis, that they could not have done it without guns.... did I forget some?

Pot - kettle - black

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Laguna says:

Yawn. Thursday. Wake me up if the turn out not to be white males.

Open mouth, insert foot! Happens so often when we make assumptions and jump to conclusions without all the evidence.

I seriously doubt that skin color has anything to do with this kind of a crime. My bet is that it has far more to do with a person's beliefs than their skin color. Some of the terrorists have been Muslims. Some have been atheists who singled out Christians. Some have been racists - the white guy who killed some blacks in a SC church. Some have been mentally ill - probably like the recent Colorado shooter. Some have been troubled kids. There was an Asian shooter on a college campus in VA a year ago or so, but I doubt it had anything to do with his skin color. I bet it was other influences in his life that prompted that. There was a black guy who tried to kill a bunch of people at the Family Research Council, but he was stopped by the security guard fortunately. He was a left winger and that was the inspiration for his crime, not his skin color. So, I don't quite get understand your racist comment here.

You are free to disagree with me, but from my perspective, these crimes have nothing to do with skin color.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

it is now your turn to make the usual excuses. Like the usual strawman that 1,5 billion muslims did not do that, that powerty/discrimination/israel (take your pick) made them do it, that every religion has their own jihadis, that they could not have done it without guns....

What 'usual straw man'? The only one of those you can pin on me is the last one, which interestingly is no 'excuse', and indeed, without guns they certainly could not have shot anyone. Unless you think peashooters and cameras would have the same effect.

I am pretty sure I have never suggested that the other points you mention have any bearing on/are any justification for killing people.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

My point is, Cleo, that there are more than just two categories for people. It is possible that any white terrorist or Muslim terrorist is truly mentally ill. AND, that their illness influenced their actions.

At the same time, it also is probably true that there is a tendency to do just what you said. And that is wrong. Each case needs to be decided based not on skin color, but on the actual evidence. I think we can all agree on that.

I think the definition of what is terrorism also comes into play here as well. Is any murder an act of terror?

For me, I see terrorism as random killing that stems out of some kind of ideology. You could have a pro-life terrorist if that ideology is what prompted them to act, although by that very act, they are showing that they are not truly pro-life.

You could have a Christian terrorist if that person's faith is what prompted them to try and kill other people, but again, their actions are totally against what they profess to believe in.

The difference between these and Muslim terrorists is that their actions can easily fit with their beliefs because there are so many verses in the Koran that, if you read it for what it says, call for killing, violence, beating, taxing, looking down on, etc of non-Muslims.

It is totally different than the "love your enemy" teaching of Christianity - which isn't often carried out very well either. But for instance, look at how the US treated Japan after WWII - and Germany. And look at how ISIS and the Taliban and Al Qaida treat their enemies when they defeat them. The difference is night and day!

There is no other religion in the world that believes in converting people by force! In Christianity, such a thing is absolutely impossible. An insincere conversion is not a conversion at all. Force does no good, but Muslims are all concerned about the outer appearance as opposed to true heart change.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I've read a number of posters use that line of - I hate to use the word in this case - reasoning. I call that whack. Guns for hunting and protection, wanting to target practice, OK, to each his own. But to overtake the government with a militia? Flat out whack. Automatic weapons in the hands of citizens (authorised or not), flat out whack.

Check yourself before you criticize my reasoning. You're deliberately twisting my words to make yourself sound good. No one ever said for the people to take over the government. But part of the reason the founders of the US left Europe is because it was dominated by tyrants and usurpers. To protect US citizens from that sort of thing, citizens were recognized to have the right to bear arms.

Just because we're in 2015 doesn't mean that it couldn't happen. I agree that it's highly unlikely for the US to be ruled by a dictator. And of course, as long as US citizens are able to pack heat, it won't happen. But point was never for the citizens to take over the government. Jeez... You should get a job at FOX news the way you spin.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

I am running out of ways to express my feelings over this type of incident. Rest in Peace to the victims, and may the families be strong.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

tjguy:

" My point is, Cleo, that there are more than just two categories for people. It is possible that any white terrorist or Muslim terrorist is truly mentally ill. "

Since terrorism is part of the islamist ideology, you´d have to count "gullible" as a category of "mentally ill". Because that is all it takes... all you have to do is to take the koranic promises of paradise for Shahids literally. So the martyrs are not any more "mentally ill" than e.g. a believer in creationism, who otherwise functions perfectly fine in society. Only more dangerous for the rest of us.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

To protect US citizens from that sort of thing, citizens were recognized to have the right to bear arms.

Sorry, Mr. Jefferson (or whoever you're pretending to be), but the 2nd amendment says no such thing. It reads, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Nowhere does it say "To avoid the domination of tyrants and usurpers, the right of the people..." Any way you look at it, the words "regulated militia" are a reference to citizens' collective responsibilities, not individual rights.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

this is beyond a gun law ( of which there are many on the books already that are not being enforced BTW).

to own a firearm does not mean you immediately dress up in tactical clothing, make bombs and kill people

prior to blaming the NRA for something it did not do, nor blaming "lack of gun laws" which if you researched you would find there are many - (but always conveniently dropped by prosecution during trial)

why do we not focus on the true subject- who were these people and what were they objectives- the President tends to minimize what's happens- Fort Hood is called an Employee Shooting - though the shooter yelled Alluha Akbar while shooting people.

and he states we will die of global warming and does not mention gun control to France...

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Why are so many of those most fond of quoting Thomas Jefferson on the 2nd Amendment, so quick to forget his other proclamation, "All men are created equal?"

When did a nation's collective memory morph into selective memory?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Stop politicizing the issue. Reports are already out that the perpetrator were Muslims.

Good one.

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"

0 ( +2 / -2 )

"Why does a citizen of the US need an automatic weapon?"

"Depends, the reason is irrelevant, but more importantly, we can and we have that right."

Now that's what I call an argument.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Sorry, Mr. Jefferson....

Haha! Very funny. But enough with the personal insults. Anyway, part of guaranteeing that the states remain free is the citizens right to bear arms against a federal government usurped by coup d'etat. Please study a little harder.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Denise Peraza and Kevin Ortiz who were both shot, phoned family members to tell them that they loved them. Another gunshot victim, Jennifer Stevens texted her mother. 14 people may not have got the chance. RIP.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Farook's name was released via social media as the news agencies did not want to release it for fear of increasing Islamophobia.

The same news agencies that are quick to release videos of a white cop abusing or shooting a black person? The media makes money this way by instilling fear and/or hatred.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The terrorists in San Bernardino were not carrying automatic weapons.

Sounds to me like we have a self-radicalized American Muslim with a Saudi/Qatari radical wife who decided to bring terror to the infidels (just as in Paris, Mumbai, Sydney, the train near Lille, Woolwich, central London, Ottawa, Dallas, Fort Hood, Charlotte, etc., etc.), and than thought "if I'm going to take out some of the unbelievers, why not specifically select some that I personally dislike, my butthead boss and that crowd of crusaders at the office, especially when they are holding some blasphemous ritual, like a Christmas celebration".

These attacks work better in places where the local population is substantially disarmed, like California, Paris, Mumbai, Sydney, the train near Lille, Woolwich, central London, Ottawa, the military facilities at Charlotte and Fort Hood, etc., etc. Not so well in Dallas.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Do many of you know the difference between an automatic weapon and a semi-automatic weapon? Do any of you realize automatic weapons are legal to own in USA? Ho many of those are involved in shootings? I'll give you a clue- the number starts with z.

This is a tragedy, all the anti gun folks just want to discuss their own view guns=death. Yet in the end guns ended this couples rampage. And the thought of zero guns in USA, keep dreaming! They will remain in the deviant people's hands. Oh, they left pipe bombs, shall we regulate pipe?

This is shaping up to be more and more like Islamic terror. Christmas party, Saudi import wife......

No laws prevent this.

Feel for the families and friends instead of immediately attacking gun laws and political motivations. Gun laws are in place, the system is quite broken. That's a fed problem. The screening seem flawed and anti gun Obama hasn't tried to fix it.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Since the wife just arrived in the US, she can't have a green card yet. Therefore it was illegal for her to be carrying a weapon.

By chance, the first armed responder to reach the scene was one of the few civilians to have made it through California's draconian licensing process. While he was too late to stop them, he got there ahead of the police. I wish there had been more like him.

As an aside, this kind of incident always makes me wonder about a point of Islamic theology. While the husband is getting busy with the 72 virgins, what exactly is the wife doing? I know she is legally required to put up with three competitors, but 72 seems over the top.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

The same news agencies that are quick to release videos of a white cop abusing or shooting a black person?

Exactly. @DaDude. The libs dish it out, but they can't take it when it comes back to them.

Farook's name was released via social media as the news agencies did not want to release it for fear of increasing Islamophobia.

Just like the news agencies did not mention the word "Black" when all those people in New Orleans were shot while they were making a hip hop video.

Th fact that he was a muslim should've been the first words out of each telecast breaking the news nationwide.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Not so well in Dallas

TravelingSales,

Dallas is one of the places ISIS tries to recruit terrorists.

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/11/21/isis-recruiting-youth-north-texas-internet-says-dallas-fbi/

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I think ISIS tries to recruit terrorists everywhere. But the fact remains that when those two terrorists drove from Phoenix to Dallas to attack, they didn't succeed as well as other terrorists everywhere, primarily because they got shot before moving more than a couple of feet from their car.

I hope we get these couple of questions answered:

1 Were their GoPro cameras streaming, and, if so, to who? 2 Did the Saudi wife get vetted before she got her visa (all Saudis are meant to) and, if so, how can we sure that the vetting of the Syrian refugees will work better?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Fort Hood is called an Employee Shooting - though the shooter yelled Alluha Akbar while shooting people.

Exactly. And if this Syed Farook or his islamic fling from Qatar did not shout "Allahu Akbar" as they mowed down innocent people with gunfire, they're still on the same page as the Fort Hood islamic shooter.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

The left coast has the strongest gun control laws in the US and it didn't help Sure wish someone at the party had a conceal carry license. the left coast needs to re-check there laws and stop changeling the rest of the USA.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

I guess I just don't get it.

Disgruntled employee gets into an argument at the company Christmas party, storms out, then later storms back in with a semi-auto rifle and shoots up his coworkers.

This is hardly the first time such a thing has happened, but this time - because the dude is Muslim - I'm supposed to tear my hair out about the evils of Islam and rant about the dangers of accepting Syrian refugees (nevermind the fact the guy is an American citizen who grew up here). Meanwhile, if the dude had been a white Christian it would it be all "shoganai" and mumble mumble 2nd Amendment mumble law abiding gun owners mumble mental illness mumble - nothing to see here, people.

I will not be surprised to find out this guy and his wife were recently radicalized by Islamist terrorist propaganda. But I'm having real difficulty understanding why whether or not the guy shouted "Allah Akbar" or not while he murdered 14 people seems to make such a difference to people. Certainly, his motivations are important to determining how we prevent such an incident from recurring, but to many of you here the man's religion seems to be the difference between extreme overreaction and no action at all. Surely the victims deserve better than that.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

left coast needs to re-check there laws and stop changeling the rest of the USA.

This true. Most of the CCW holders are retired law enforcement or state / federal employees. The John Doe's are nearly always rejected unless special circumstances exist.

Muslims aren't the bad guys. These guys were bad.

Yeah, they were bad. They just painted a darker picture of the refugees. With even women involved in terrorist attacks now. This is why we shouldn't allow them to enter the US.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

"strongest gun control laws."

I laugh. Gun control laws are watered-down hunks of Swiss cheese, just like the NRA and gun nutters want them.

We should be building more mental hospitals and putting gun owners in them. They see no link whatsoever in having hundreds of millions of guns and gun deaths topping 30,000 a year.

None whatsoever.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

The left coast has the strongest gun control laws in the US

the two assault rifles and two handguns used in the violence were purchased legally

2 ( +5 / -3 )

This happens in Europe everyone is shocked but when it happens in the states the world just says " again" was told once by a mate who works for a multinational that when they are implementing layoffs they have to special consider armed security in only the US!! Too many guns but of course it will never change with so many good ole boys wanting there guns

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Willib,

Err.... like the French, whose gun laws are to blame for the Paris massacres and the attempted on at the Eurostar recently, according to your logic?

What gun laws are you talking about?

Some of your tinfoil hat sites a feeding you some really wrong information. Like your non-existent "no-go zones" for non-Muslims.

I'm guessing at this point you're taking a leaf from Donald Trump's book of bollocks. Keep repeating the lies you know to be false. There's always some muppet that will believe you.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

As an American I refuse to become a soft target that many in the world want us to become like them

1 ( +5 / -4 )

H. Clinton'S response: "I refuse to accept this as normal. We must take action to stop gun violence."

No condolences? No praise for law enforcement. No mention of security concerns for the future waves of islamic refugees who will be entering the US?

No reference to muslim, extremists or radical islam? Is it something in the water?- Obama doesn't and will not use those terms neither.

Considering the upsurge in Muslim-related attacks on Americans, we need more Islam control. . .

Yup. Too bad our leaders are blind.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

If Obama truly wanted to curb gun violence, he would sign an EO today that would include:

Restricting immigration, including Muslim immigration. Note that a number of recent mass shooters/violence (Chattanooga, Fort Hood, San Bernardino, the Boston Marathon, etc.) were committed either by Muslim immigrants or their children.

Defunding sanctuary cities, which protect violent felons, many of whom go on to commit gun violence (such as the 5x deported Mexican illegal who murdered Kate Steinle in San Francisco).

Building a wall on the Mexican border. Even if all guns were made illegal in the US, we'd still have guns coming in from our porous border with Mexico. Mexico is awash in guns and its gun violence is much worse than ours.
-5 ( +5 / -10 )

Jim Jeffries - Gun Control. WATCH IT!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Whether Farook and his wife were jihadis or just went postal, the US has recorded its 342nd mass shooting (one with four or more victims including the shooter) this year.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

It does sound more like a terrorist attack than a nut(s) with a gun.

"Than"? Didn't you mean "Also known as"?

While the blood is still on the floor, wait for the demagogues to turn this into a political talking point. "People did not do this, guns did it! Ban guns, and it won´t happen!".

While banning guns won't stop murders, when was the last time you heard of a vicious knife attack that left 14 dead and over a dozen others wounded? So yeah, banning guns will stop the "deaths by the dozen" whenever someone turns psychopath. Those who have drank the NRA Kool-Ade will try to deny it, but the sane world knows it to be true.

Yeah, I get it you don't like guns and wish we didn't have the right to own them, but we do and there is nothing that will change that, no matter how many libs try to go against it.

Time for a refresher on the Constitution. ANY part of the Constitution - including the first 10 amendments that comprise the so-called "Bill of Rights" - may be amended or or outright deleted. That provision was put in the Constitution by the "founding fathers" that the NRA loves to worship. The NRA relies on shills like you to try and play down that fact, but with every mass murder by firearms the call for a National Referendum on the Second Amendment grows. (Cue the, "I'll give up my gun when they pry my cold, dead fingers from it!" fanaticism.)

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Texasmagpie:

" Even if all guns were made illegal in the US, we'd still have guns coming in from our porous border with Mexico. Mexico is awash in guns and its gun violence is much worse than ours. "

err... wait a second. Does´nt Mexico have strict gun control? That means that there is no gun crime in Mexico, doesn´t it? I mean, I am not American, but I have told on this list that "gun control" = "no gun crime" over and over again, so that must be true, no?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Whether Farook and his wife were jihadis or just went postal, the US has recorded its 342nd mass shooting (one with four or more victims including the shooter) this year.

That figure is just.... mind-boggling.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

when was the last time you heard of a vicious knife attack that left 14 dead and over a dozen others wounded?

9/11 Hijackers didn't fire a "single shot", they used box cutters.

Restricting immigration, including Muslim immigration. Note that a number of recent mass shooters/violence (Chattanooga, Fort Hood, San Bernardino, the Boston Marathon, etc.) were committed either by Muslim immigrants or their children.

Good for pointing that out. Lawful, US, taxpaying voters aren't likely to commit these types of atrocities as Tex. mentions.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

@WilliB

Yeah, you're correct. Mexico on paper is a gun-free zone. Of course, the exception to that rule was when Obama illegally sent guns over the border and into the hands of Mexican drug lords in his "fast and furious" foreign policy screwup. . . .

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Please refrain from any further anti-Obama rants on this thread.

This isn't a gun control issue. Despite the picture that the Obama administration and politicians want to paint. Somehow next year's election is more important than actually protecting lives. The Europeans are calling it what it is and treating as such. We need to do the same.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

I would buy workplace violence if the guy went out to his car and pulled out a gun and shot up the party. But to be in the party, leave and go get your body armor and guns, and have a home with explosive devices and toss fake explosives at police tells me that this was in the making for a long time, or this couple really hated his work.

For those who keep saying that people like me are jumping to conclusions too fast, his own co-workers thought that he was a nice guy, kept to himself, and had recently grown a full beard, and started wearing that "man-dress" we in the non-Muslim world call it to work, and his own father says that he was a devout Muslim.

For the gun issue, if these were part of a cell, then they are going to get the guns anyway they can. The guns used in Paris weren't bought legally either, yet France has very strict gun control laws and they somehow were able to get them and use them.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Posters say what you want to say but those who committed the crime will never walk the streets again. When a crime is committed the police force which is the best solve the problems they don't get swept under the table for years to come and never be unsolved. I read most of the post here and they are the same bumping fools who THINK they know everything. I work minutes from the actual scene and if you were anywhere near this scene you couldn't go nowhere as you can see these idiots never got a chance to escape they knew their life was at an end. So look into your monitors and speculate all you want and talk about guns, but remember knives kill too!!! Wait people kill not knives or guns!!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

This is from Yahoo. "Farook's father, quoted by the New York Daily News tabloid, described his son as a devout Muslim. 'He was very religious. He would go to work, come back, go to pray, come back. He's Muslim.'"

OK, I'm confused. His father is calling him a devout Muslim but his violence does not reflect Islam? Which is it?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Wc626: "Why are we blaming guns? Let's blame the real culprits- the extremists already in the US"

You are aware that the NRA sells to, and refuses to STOP selling to, terrorists like these guys, right? Kind of blows away your argument that it's not about guns, as well as support for the NRA.

OssanAmerica: "This isn't a gun control issue."

Again, then how were these guys armed? The NRA sells to terrorists -- it's well known, and you guys support it.

When you guys support the NRA, you guys support these terrorists getting guns and doing what they did today, plain and simple. Don't talk about 'lawful citizens' getting them and it being fine when you also support terrorists getting them, and when the terrorists are lawful citizens until they commit murder anyway.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I was going to comment on this when I woke up this morning but I didn't because it was just breaking news at the time. I was just thinking 'oh man, not another mass-shooting in America', but now all the evidence points to a terrorist attack. Whenever these mass shootings happen these days, the gun loving nuts are always talking about 'mental health' being the real problem, not the crazy gun laws you have in America... It's been said over and over again so many times, so now people with only half a braincell start thinking - 'hey, maybe we need to look at fixing the mental health service before looking at the gun laws' ...

For anyone that hasn't watched this documentary, 'Merchants of Doubt' is a really good watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YmRovaSYkE

It explains how the big corporations have been able to change public opinion EVEN WHEN SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE clearly show's the opposite.

In my opinion, the NRA is using the same tactics to pull the wool over your eyes on the gun issue...

1 ( +2 / -1 )

So, by that standards, we're supporting terrorists when we let our fellow citizens walk around free because some of them might commit crimes in the future. We should lock everyone up at birth.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

9/11 Hijackers didn't fire a "single shot", they used box cutters.

By all accounts, the box cutters killed a single flight attendant and was used to threaten another. Planes were used as the main weapon on 9/11, not box cutters.

Good for pointing that out. Lawful, US, taxpaying voters aren't likely to commit these types of atrocities as Tex. mentions.

Pretty meaningless statement, don't you think? If they're "lawful", of COURSE they won't be committing atrocities! It's sad how quickly you've forgotten what "US taxpaying voters" have done recently: http://www.japantoday.com/category/world/view/3-killed-9-wounded-in-shootout-at-planned-parenthood-clinic-in-colorado

Christian, Muslim, apparently it doesn't matter WHAT religion you subscribe to in order to become a mass murderer.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

smithinjapan. I'm fine with a lawful sale / purchase of a firearm. I'm not fine when an islamic couple of middle eastern descent team up in military gear, rifles, handguns, decoy pipe bombs to spoil a christmas party.

The NRA sells to terrorists

No they don't. If suspected terrorist on FBI's watch list attempted to purchase a firearm, the sale would be terminated. In CA, the whole process of purchasing a firearm takes 10 days.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

You are aware that the NRA sells to, and refuses to STOP selling to, terrorists like these guys, right?

To be fair, the NRA doesn't sell weapons of any kind that I am aware of. The only thing I know of that they sell is memberships.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

In CA, the whole process of purchasing a firearm takes 10 days.

Wow, thank god it takes a whole 10 days. That will really deter those terrorists.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

There's 320M people in USA and 19M in LA metro. The country's not collapsing tomorrow. Unless Putin goes amok with the nukes.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

" The guns used in Paris weren't bought legally either, yet France has very strict gun control laws and they somehow were able to get them and use them. "

French police have been carrying out raids in the (supposedly non-existant) shariah enclaves ad have retrieved a massive amount of weapons, including rocket launchers. Which of curse is only the tip of the iceberg. And yep, this is France, with its iron-clad gun laws, so it should be a gun-free country, following the doctrine touted by many on here on JapanToday. Yet, with Europe`s de facto open borders, this gun control does not seen to work all the well now, does it.

Of course, in the US with their strictly controlled borders, it would work perfectly! Ahem....

2 ( +4 / -2 )

But to overtake the government with a militia? Flat out whack. Automatic weapons in the hands of citizens (authorised or not), flat out whack.

Who's talking about taking over the government?

Now that's what I call an argument.

No, it was meant as a statement.

The only one of those you can pin on me is the last one, which interestingly is no 'excuse', and indeed, without guns they certainly could not have shot anyone. Unless you think peashooters and cameras would have the same effect.

Talk about a straw man argument. Even if guns were illegal, that doesn't mean as in the Paris incident that they can't buy, bribe or smuggle guns into the country or as the reports have been coming in, one of the guys was very proficient in assembling IEDs, so either way, guns or NO guns, if these people want to kill you, they will find a way.

You are aware that the NRA sells to, and refuses to STOP selling to, terrorists like these guys, right? Kind of blows away your argument that it's not about guns, as well as support for the NRA.

No, it's all about liberals trying to do everything they can to take away the "2nd Amendment." Give it up, doesn't matter if you guys have a meltdown, it's not going to happen.

When you guys support the NRA, you guys support these terrorists getting guns and doing what they did today, plain and simple.

Then you can also safely make the argument, if we allow these refugees to come in, we are letting in a few terrorists that will definitely be mixed in with the refugees and in letting them in, those terrorists are affiliated and implicated in some attack, then that means by your logic, we shouldn't let them in as well. I agree with that and why take a chance?

Don't talk about 'lawful citizens' getting them and it being fine when you also support terrorists getting them, and when the terrorists are lawful citizens until they commit murder anyway.

What? Are we trying to use liberal logic to justify the panic of liberals wanting to strip and confiscate all guns from law-abiding Americans?

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Wc626: If suspected terrorist on FBI's watch list attempted to purchase a firearm, the sale would be terminated. In CA, the whole process of purchasing a firearm takes 10 days.

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/gun-show-firearms-bankground-checks-state-laws-map.html

Golly, then someone would have to go to any of the states in red in the above map to skip the background check and buy at a gun show. But please, continue to tell me all about these fascinating background checks that you speak of.

More Swiss cheese gun laws, courtesy of the NRA and gun supporters. At this point the best description for background checks would be "optional." Would you like to change that?

2 ( +5 / -3 )

WilliB,

French police have been carrying out raids in the (supposedly non-existant) shariah enclaves ad have retrieved a massive amount of weapons, including rocket launchers. Which of curse is only the tip of the iceberg. And yep, this is France, with its iron-clad gun laws, so it should be a gun-free country

Ah, so you ARE Donald Trump then Willi. Figures.

"France, with its iron-clad gun laws"

Hahahahahahah. Bwhahahahah. The laxest gun laws in Europe. Hunting a working class tradition. Keep spinning the lies WilliB, I'll keep challenging your nonsense.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Laguna "wake me up if they turn out not to be white males". Syad and his wife, Tashfeen were Muslims. She was from Saudi Arabia and they were married there. They had been in contact with international terrorism groups. For all the people who mentioned the NRA and our second amendment, their weapon arsenal was not legal. They had an "IED factory" in their home. That is not covered under the second amendment, nor something that the NRA would support. France has strict gun control laws, and yet terrorists were still able to procure guns and kill people.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The NRA gave them the guns by stopping appropriate control of military hard wear. These sick freaks killed for no reason. Now the NRA wants it's deluded fans to claim it was the victims' faults for not being armed.

Americans know the truth.

The NRA is putting military hard wear in the hands of anyone who wants one.

The NRA fights waiting periods and background checks.

The NRA threatens Legislators who even consider appropriate limits on weapons of mass destruction.

The NRA guarantees mental cases can get guns.

The NRA prompts its paranoids to threaten to kill anyone who discusses gun control, one of their nut jobs said so on YouTube.

The NRA blamed the children slaughtered at Newtown as part of a conspiracy.

The NRA wants an armed guard in every building and facility.

The NRA wants Americans carrying AR-15s at the Mall.

The NRA has stopped vital research into gun violence.

The NRA operates at the command and control of the gun industry.

Stop politicizing the complete lack of control of weapons of mass destruction?

The NRA has a strangle hold on Americans' safety solely through the Political threats they issue to responsible Legislators. Forty years of the NRA has created the slaughter house that is the States. And their members are ready to kill to keep it that way.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

I'm old enough to remember back before 1968 you could order guns from mail order and it was delivered by the US Mail. Hand guns, surplus arms, rifles, shotguns what ever. Walk into Sears, lay down the money no questions asked. It's hard to believe now, but many companies in the past had well stocked hunting sections It was a different world back then, we'll never see it again for better or worse but we certainly didn't see these kinds of large scale shootings on a monthly basis.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Yawn. Thursday. Wake me up if the turn out not to be white males.

Well Laguna, I guess that turns out to be one of the more embarrassing posts of the day, especially as one was a non-white female.

But I am still confused as to why you find mass murder so dull as to make you yawn. I hope you are now awake like you've had a triple espresso.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The NRA has a strangle hold on Americans'

Hmmmm, so what you're saying, they are effectively forcing Americans to support them?

safety solely through the Political threats they issue to responsible Legislators.

What a bunch of BS! So what about the liberal base that DOES support the NRA like Harry Reid? How do you feel about that?

Forty years of the NRA has created the slaughter house that is the States. And their members are ready to kill to keep it that way.

Ahhh, so it was all the fault of the NRA and NO ONE else was responsible for killing or murdering people or how about the people that have used their firearms to defend themselves against an intruder or an attacker? Kc, relax. The NRA luckily isn't going anywhere, so you don't have to get all wired up about it.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Spontaneous and workplace related? Yep, after a brief argument at that party Farook went home, said to Malik, " honey, let's drop off our baby at moms, wire the house with explosives, get into our military gear, pack those bombs, guns n ammo we just happen to have, slaughter as many infidels - er, I mean, people, as possible and get martyrd. To which she replies, " sounds good!"

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The bomb materials were purchased legally. Shall we ban those items?

A terrorist will obtain whatever it is they need to perform their dispicable acts. Just as we saw in Paris. And don't forget the NRA comprises of both political parties. Just as praying Christians comprise of both parties yet the democratic politicians jump on gun control while the GOP offered condolences. I see what party cares more about citizens with that observation. I sure am glad I am not a democrat! I much prefer kindness and respect.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

I do agree that the length to which the NRA will go to interfere with the ATF's ability to investigate corrupt gun dealers and criminal buyers is substantial. They have even supported legislation that would have allowed ATF to only impose sanctions on gun dealers that "willfully" commit violations of ATF rules, meaning that corrupt dealers could attempt to avoid prosecution by claiming that their violations were mistakes and not intentional.

NRA-Backed Legislative Amendments that hamper the ability of state and federal overseers to enforce existing laws and firearm dealer regulations isn't a 2nd amendment issue it makes as complicit as black market traffickers, murders and terrorists in selling weapons to criminal networks.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Err.... like the French, whose gun laws are to blame for the Paris massacres and the attempted on at the Eurostar recently, according to your logic? Do you seriously think a new law will stop those who are determined to go on a rampage, especially in a country that is already awash with weapons?

Not a new law, but banning hand guns and assault weapons. Weapons whose sole purpose is to take human life. Yes, I think getting rid of all of these types of weapons, except for those in law enforcement, will save more lives. See...I value human life more than your so called right to bear arms. Do you? Do any of you who continually defend the 2nd amendment? Is your right to carry a handgun more important than the current loss of human lives?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Lizz - very good point. These mass shootings are a comparatively recent phenomenon, and pretty much confined to the US. The big question of course is, why?

This particular one is Islamic inspired, tho.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

These mass shootings are a comparatively recent phenomenon, and pretty much confined to the US. The big question of course is, why?

Well it definitely has nothing to do with the ridiculous number of guns there. I don't see how anyone could ever make that connection.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

They didn't buy the Pipe Bombs at the gun store.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

HawkeyeDEC. 03, 2015 - 03:33PM JST "Interesting that the police chief on cnn and other officials in suits and ties are seen laughing before they are aware they are on live camera. You have to ask yourself what those clowns are thinking. Cops in the USA are overpaid, undertrained and think they are above the law that they have pledged to uphold."

@Hawkeye, could they be laughing because they know the truth behind this, and that is, it's all just a big hoax and here we are, falling for it and believing what the MSM reports. I will say it again, the Hegelian Dialectic is being used here to push an agenda and they did a good job on it because the masses fell for this crap.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

They didn't buy the Pipe Bombs at the gun store.

Scary you say that cause when the next group of islamic terrorist go on another rampage in the US, they will have ironed out the malfunctions of those pipe bombs and ied's.

. . . But don't worry, everyone and their mother will pin those explosions the NRA too.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Wow! Senate repugs have voted to allow suspected terrorists, (domestic abusers, and other scum) to buy guns.

---The NRA tightened up their noose on Republican Senators' necks, because after all, they bought and paid for these votes. As a consequence, Republican Senators voted to continue to allow the mentally ill, felons and suspected terrorists to buy guns.

Now, tell me that repubilcans do not have blood on their hands.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The best way is to let the states or counties decide, just like there used to be dry counties in the southern U.S. that prohibited alcohol there could be counties that made gun ownership so difficult that the status quo would change. As you can see from all the back and forth here, the 2nd will never be repealed so its not worth hoping for in this life time. Let the states exercise their 10th admendment privilage and decide for themselves. Freedom of relegion was once routinely abused and children were denied medical attention due to whack relegious beliefs, but common sense won out and that constitutional clause was reinterpreted. Otherwise a federal decree will be ordered and marshall law put into place if this insanity continues. Its interesting how the gun lovers say guns are to protect them from the government, but the government has only become more powerful and more citizens are dying by police. Its citizens killing each other then the police using the hammer approach to deal with it all. Let progressive libertarians create their own gun free utopia all within the loosely defined constraints of the dated constitution and let the others have there way; you can choose to live where you want.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

If it walks like a Duck, quacks like a Duck it is a Duck. This was a terrorist Jihadi attack. The US gun laws had nothing to due with it. They had an arsenal ready. Keep up with the FBI reports.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

nishinariku:

" This was a terrorist Jihadi attack. The US gun laws had nothing to due with it. "

Exactly. Following the logic that this shooting is a gun control isse, the Boston bombing was a pressure cooker issue, the 9/11 attacks were a cutter-knife issue, and shoe bomber incident was a footwear issue.

I would respectfully ask the "gun control" here to pause and think for a moment. This is seriously what you are claiming??

0 ( +3 / -3 )

"Every year an average of 9,200 Americans are murdered by handguns.....This level of violence must be stopped. If the passage of the Brady bill were to result in a reduction of only 10-15% of those numbers (and it could be a good deal greater), it would be well worth making it the law of the land.”

Ronald Reagan speaking in the days when 9,200 Americans were murdered by these filthy devices. This gun-hating, 'freedom-hating', liberal pansy wouldn't stand a chance with rhetoric like that nowadays.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Jimizo:

So, you too think that the Jihadist terrorism is an issue of gun control, pressure-cooker control, shoe control, cutter-knife control, or fertilizer/diesel oil control?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The best way is to let the states or counties decide, just like there used to be dry counties in the southern U.S. that prohibited alcohol there could be counties that made gun ownership so difficult that the status quo would change.

I know it sounds good. But it won't work like that. The county I lived in was a "dry" county. But the one next to it was "wet." So everyone from my county would just drive 20 minutes away to buy alcohol and bring it back. It was actually quite silly.

As for guns, people have often cited that even though Chicago has one of the toughest gun laws in America, they still have one of the highest gun-related crimes / deaths. What they fail to mention is that you can also just drive 20 minutes away to Indiana and buy a gun.

Nothing is going to change unless it happens on a national level.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Yes it does sound too good to be true but thats where theres a catch. Guns would be allowed, in keeping with the 2nd, but it would be so cost prohibitive and subject to so many inspections, taxes, fines and exams (like Japan, or cars in Singapore in order to control traffic) that nobody would want to keep them. Most imortantly, like minded ciitizens would enforce it by watching and in touch with the vine. It wouldnt be a minority facist control situation; the majority would keep it out and design clever ways to enforce it. The dry county thing was more of a moral bible thumper solution that nobody enforced except on Sunday.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

OK, I think it is true that there are too many guns in the USA to ever get rid of them completely. But how about banning the sale of ammunition, especially rounds that are used for military grade carbines and rifles? Of course there will always be a black market in the stuff, but you would not be able to stroll into Walmart and pick up 3000 rounds of AK-47 bullets.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

This was a terror plot waiting to happen I'm all for gun control but people are responsible for most of the chaos happening in this world.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The killer (Syed Farook) had been disgruntled about some kind argument regarding "islam" with another coworker.

Heh. I've seen catholics and protestants exchange words. I've seen the Jehova's Witnesses ignore everyone else's taunts. No need for those groups to bust out the tactical swat gear, rifles, bibles and pipe bombs though.

Another case of a coworker dishing it out, but the recipient not being able to handle it. This is why muslims DO NOT belong in western societies.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Wc626 The killer (Syed Farook) had been disgruntled about some kind argument regarding "islam" with another coworker.

Heh. I've seen catholics and protestants exchange words. I've seen the Jehova's Witnesses ignore everyone else's taunts. No need for those groups to bust out the tactical swat gear, rifles, bibles and pipe bombs though.

Another case of a coworker dishing it out, but the recipient not being able to handle it. This is why muslims DO NOT belong in western societies.

They were connected with ISIS so this was a massacre waiting to happen. Im with you on this though: muslims do not belong in western societies. Theres just a different set of "values" in action. A young muslim woman marries a young muslim man, they have a baby together all the while assembling a hoard of guns and bombs and massacre a christmas party. makes "sense" for them, but not for us.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Im with you on this though: muslims do not belong in western societies. Theres just a different set of "values" in action.

Actually its this kind of thinking, "us" vs. "them", that makes it so hard for people of different nationalities, races, sexualities, and religions to live together. You're just as guilty for causing conflict because of your lack of acceptance, your unwillingness to see people as human beings. Perhaps you might actually listen to John Lennon's "Imagine" song again.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

You're just as guilty for causing conflict because of your lack of acceptance, your unwillingness to see people as human beings.

Damn straight. Why should I have to accept or respect their "values" In my own country (US)? The nerve of some of these foreigners . . . . wanting to live in america and demand expectations. It is "they" who need to accept our way.

Not the other way around.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Damn straight. Why should I have to accept or respect their "values" In my own country (US)? The nerve of some of these foreigners . . . . wanting to live in america and demand expectations. It is "they" who need to accept our way.

Not the other way around.

Spoken like a true Nationalist. But the U.S. does not belong to you alone. It is home to a multitude of beliefs. I do understand your feelings, though. There are people here in Japan who also think the same as you.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

But the U.S. does not belong to you alone. It is home to a multitude of beliefs.

It belongs more to me than it does to "them" . . . For generations we have fought its wars, voted, pay taxes and serve the US.

All the new arrivals (past decade or two) who are making money in the US, good for you. All I'm saying is that they should respect our ways.

If I went to Riyadh and asked for a BBQ pulled-pork sandwich and a light beer, they'd laugh their asses off. I'd prob be killed on the spot. But in the US these scary "things" hidden under black burqas and shopping in our local malls is acceptable . . . because we must respect their religion. Because if we do not, we will be considered racists.

It's nonsense.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

maxjapankDEC. 05, 2015 - 08:32AM JST

Actually its this kind of thinking, "us" vs. "them", that makes it so hard for people of different nationalities, races, sexualities, and religions to live together. You're just as guilty for causing conflict because of your lack of acceptance, your unwillingness to see people as human beings. Perhaps you might actually listen to John Lennon's "Imagine" song again.

Sorry to break this to you max, but John Lennon himself admitted when a disappointed friend observing Yoko's thousands of mink coats reminded him, "Imagine no possessions, remember John?" "Thats just a bloody song!" John replied. The words had as much meaning for John as those in I Am the Walrus, or Being For the Benefit of Mr Kite. Its called show biz.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The words had as much meaning for John as those in I Am the Walrus, or Being For the Benefit of Mr Kite. Its called show biz.

I think the Beatles were on acid when they wrote "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite."

Perhaps you might actually listen to John Lennon's "Imagine" song again.

There's a real world out there. But according to you, unicorns, floating castles, rainbows and hobos are "reality."

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Sorry to break this to you max, but John Lennon himself admitted when a disappointed friend observing Yoko's thousands of mink coats reminded him, "Imagine no possessions, remember John?" "Thats just a bloody song!" John replied. The words had as much meaning for John as those in I Am the Walrus, or Being For the Benefit of Mr Kite. Its called show biz.

No. The song has meaning. A very good meaning. And I'm sure even with Lennon's remark about the shoes, he believed in the message. The real world is that we have fanatics in the Muslim world and in the Western world. Fanatics are unwilling to accept any other ways except their own. It is the "world" you and them live in that continues this fighting. And unfortunately, we others are endangered because of it.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

maxjapankDEC. 05, 2015 - 04:13PM JST

The Fanatics are unwilling to accept any other ways except their own. It is the "world" you and them live in that continues this fighting. And unfortunately, we others are endangered because of it.

what the...??

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

A heavily armed man and woman dressed for battle opened fire on a holiday banquet

Now that it has been confirmed- "A heavily armed jihadist and his middle eastern "imported" wife-who pledged to ISIS- indeed dressed for battle" have not only messed up a holiday banquet, but put their religion on BLAST.

And put USA on alert. Stay up everyone. Report any suspicious activity . . . worry not about being labeled as "racial profiling", safety first.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Ever looked at the size of the US military? If the government wants to oppress the people, they will do it, and no amount of citizen guns will stop it. This argument against gun control is ridiculous.

Yes, it is about 1.2 million active with an additional half million if you include its reserve force that is under the brand name National Guard. So about 1.7 million. Only around 15-25% of the military is trained for front line combat, so for ground forces think infantry, the rest are basically pure logistics, so that means you have around at most 425k military forces that are trained for front line combat. Now you take that 425,000 and you spread it out over the entire country of the USA and you surround them with, depending upon whom you believe, 77-100+ million gun owners, this is assuming all gun owners would fight or resist the USA military, historically it was around 20% that were involved in the war of independence for example, and you realize that the sheer size of the country, for example the distance from Anaheim California to St. Louis Missouri is about the same distance from Paris France to Moscow Russia if you travel by car, plus the sheer number of gun owners in the USA would simply overwhelm the US military. The country is too big and the sheer number of the opposing force would stretch the US military, it would be able to control certain pockets of the country but not much else. The most likely scenario is that the US military would adopt the Afghanistan and Iraq strategy where it controls the major cities but no much else.

If there was to be a conflict there can be no question that the insurgent forces would take much higher casualties than the American military would, the real the downfall to the insurgent forces would be there wiliness to fight and more importantly to die. If they are not willing to die they would probably retreat at the first sign of battle with the US military.

You are aware that the NRA sells to, and refuses to STOP selling to, terrorists like these guys, right? Kind of blows away your argument that it's not about guns, as well as support for the NRA.

I highly you doubt you would disagree with the reasons why that bill/terror watch list is opposed by not just the NRA but also the ACLU. There is no due process at all with regards on who is placed on the terror watch list, the criteria for how people is placed or determined to be placed is entirely secret, and did I mention there is no due process which means you can't challenge why you are placed on the terror watch list and it also means that the government does not have to prove or provide any evidence for why you are on this list.....oh and by the way did you know that this list is shared with at least 22 other nations?

What we do know is that in some cases in order to get on this list can be due to "reasonable suspicion", what does this reasonable suspicion look like you might ask????? Here is an answer for you Smith: It requires no concrete evidence or irrefutable proof/evidence .

Consider a real world context, actual criminal justice, where an officer needs reasonable suspicion to stop a person in the street and ask him or her a few questions. Courts have controversially held that avoiding eye contact with an officer, traveling alone, and traveling late at night, all amount to reasonable suspicion. Now use that same criteria to label people terrorist suspects.

The Maryland state law enforcement acknowledged back in 2008 they placed over 50 people on the terror watch list because they peacefully protested against the death penalty and the Iraq war, those people who were placed on the watch list have no due process to be taken off that list.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/07/AR2008100703245.html?hpid=topnews

Until the criteria is made public, people placed on the terror watch list are notified about placed on it, and have a due process to challenge there placement, until all of that is done the terror watch list should be scrapped but seeing as that is not going to happen then at the very least the terror watch list names should not be included in the NICS system.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@Noliving

"The distance from Anaheim California to St. Louis Missouri is about the same as the distance from Paris France to Moscow Russia if you travel by car...."

Surely it's the same distance whether you travel by car, bicycle or walk? : )

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Damn straight. Why should I have to accept or respect their "values" In my own country (US)?

Do you respect the values of caucasian Americans whose families have been in America for generation and are vegan, mormon, anti-abortion, pacifists or Catholic?

If I went to Riyadh and asked for a BBQ pulled-pork sandwich and a light beer, they'd laugh their asses off. I'd prob be killed on the spot.

Would you, now. Ever heard of that actually happening to anyone? Well, if you hold Saudi values in such disdain just remember that successive US administrations have tacitly condoned everything they do. They chop off heads and hands for non-existent misdemeanors and force women into 3rd class status? Don't expect any Republican or Democrat politician to do anything about it.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Surely it's the same distance whether you travel by car, bicycle or walk? : )

And if you travel by airplane?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

If these sub-humans are ISIS connected.......

@Markg they are ISIS connected from what i heard but that could just be the american news making it sound "better".

1 ( +1 / -0 )

If these sub-humans are ISIS connected.......

@Markg they are ISIS connected from what i heard but that could just be the american news making it sound "better".

I have this strange feeling that the two who were killed "in a police shootout" might not be the perps.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

@williB

Ban guns, and it won´t happen!".

So predictable.

Yes, that is pretty much what I'd predict - ban guns, and it wouldn't happen.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites