Deranged Rhino Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 (edited) This is terrible. Im gonna go bazerk if these were Syrian refugees. Doesn't appear to be that. LA Times reports it started at a party and is work related. https://www.reddit.com/live/w0nn1o5hu90y "A senior federal official who is monitoring the case said investigators believe one of the shooters left the party after getting into an argument and returned with one or two armed companions." Edited December 3, 2015 by Deranged Rhino
Captain_Quint Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 What if it's white guys? Its still terrible, nonetheless.
Marv's Neighbor Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 Now we'll hear all the crap about stricter gun laws again! As if the shooter(s) would have given a rip about the legality of their actions.
Reed83HOF Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 (edited) What if it's white guys? well they have mental issues then...nothing to see here move along Btw I was like 5 miles from where this occurred today while traveling for work Now we'll hear all the crap about stricter gun laws again! As if the shooter(s) would have given a rip about the legality of their actions. honestly this is bullsh!t excuse- it works elsewhere in the world without an issue...sorry to say, but it is a fact. And no I am not going to prove it because you disbelieve it. It's called google do some fair and balanced research. It works in Europe and Australia... Edited December 3, 2015 by Reed83HOF
What a Tuel Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 (edited) well they have mental issues then...nothing to see here move along Btw I was like 5 miles from where this occurred today while traveling for work honestly this is bullsh!t excuse- it works elsewhere in the world without an issue...sorry to say, but it is a fact. And no I am not going to prove it because you disbelieve it. It's called google do some fair and balanced research. It works in Europe and Australia... Hope everything is well. The mental issues thing is BS though. Mental issues is a thing, and are a reason someone might go ballistic. I am not sure why people cannot distinguish between different threats. These do not need to be lumped together to satisfy some snarky attitude that international terrorism isn't as much a threat as domestic terrorism. As for guns, well we are a culture - with guns. It is time to get over that fact, and assign responsibility to the people who commit acts of violence. Whatever weapon this guy used did not persuade him to do it. Nor did whatever he used to make the bombs, or pipebombs or whatever the freak built. Edited December 3, 2015 by What a Tuel
eball Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 Now we'll hear all the crap about stricter gun laws again! As if the shooter(s) would have given a rip about the legality of their actions. To the contrary...if all of the meeting attendees had simply been carrying, then the shooter would be dead along with probably everyone else. Guns solve everything!
dpberr Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 One of these days we will get serious about mental health issues and background checks. I'm a gun owner and appreciate the right to own guns. However, I'm not blind to the fact that something has to be done to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally unstable as much as we can. I'm not a big fan of the President but he has a point - there are people on No-Fly lists that can't fly on an airplane but could walk into a gun store and purchase weapons. There are people who can't purchase fertilizer yet can purchase weapons. Post OKC, the Feds assembled a watch list due to concerns you had others out there manufacturing truck bombs. There are people who have PFAs against them and yet can purchase weapons. We can clean up the background checks and the loopholes without taking all the guns away. I've never understood why the NRA refuses to support measures like those.
KD in CA Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 This is terrible. Im gonna go bazerk if these were Syrian refugees. Not quite....Saudi Arabia. I guess his arranged marriage Saudi bride didn't go through the years-long background check process we've been hearing so much about lately. http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/03/us/syed-farook-tashfeen-malik-mass-shooting-profile/index.html Co-worker Patrick Baccari told the Los Angeles Times that Farook recently visited Saudi Arabia to meet a woman he met online. They returned as husband and wife.
BringBackFergy Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 To the contrary...if all of the meeting attendees had simply been carrying, then the shooter would be dead along with probably everyone else. Guns solve everything! I agree with this. The only way to defend yourself against these deranged lunatics (and terrorists) is to protect yourself. If a few of these people were conceal carry, the death toll may have been 2 or 3 instead of 14. Do guns solve everything? No. But would I want to be armed if these pieces of **** came storming into my office "Holiday" party? You bet your ass I would. These terrorists (and devout Muslims as has been confirmed) will get their hands on guns no matter how strict you make the gun laws...to limit (or preclude) my access to guns in defense of human life will perpetuate the problem. See http://www.vocativ.com/news/256909/isis-san-bernardino-mass-shooting-america-burning/ to get a glimpse of how these bastards think. Irrational animals. Religion of peace? !@#$ that.
FireChan Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 I agree with this. The only way to defend yourself against these deranged lunatics (and terrorists) is to protect yourself. If a few of these people were conceal carry, the death toll may have been 2 or 3 instead of 14. Do guns solve everything? No. But would I want to be armed if these pieces of **** came storming into my office "Holiday" party? You bet your ass I would. These terrorists (and devout Muslims as has been confirmed) will get their hands on guns no matter how strict you make the gun laws...to limit (or preclude) my access to guns in defense of human life will perpetuate the problem. See http://www.vocativ.com/news/256909/isis-san-bernardino-mass-shooting-america-burning/ to get a glimpse of how these bastards think. Irrational animals. Religion of peace? !@#$ that. If Fergy is this fired up, you know it's serious.
WotAGuy Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 If Fergy is this fired up, you know it's serious. He's not even arguing with himself about it.
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 4, 2015 Posted December 4, 2015 He's not even arguing with himself about it. Good enough background check for me! Anyway, the genie is out of the bottle. The time was to stop the production and proliferation 35 years ago... Pack 'em if you gotta 'em!
truth on hold Posted December 4, 2015 Posted December 4, 2015 Giants safety Nat Berhe says cousin was killed in San Bernardino shooting http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/12/03/new-york-giants-nat-berhe-cousin-killed-san-bernardino-shooting
Gordio Posted December 4, 2015 Posted December 4, 2015 One of these days we will get serious about mental health issues and background checks. I'm a gun owner and appreciate the right to own guns. However, I'm not blind to the fact that something has to be done to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally unstable as much as we can. I'm not a big fan of the President but he has a point - there are people on No-Fly lists that can't fly on an airplane but could walk into a gun store and purchase weapons. There are people who can't purchase fertilizer yet can purchase weapons. Post OKC, the Feds assembled a watch list due to concerns you had others out there manufacturing truck bombs. There are people who have PFAs against them and yet can purchase weapons. We can clean up the background checks and the loopholes without taking all the guns away. I've never understood why the NRA refuses to support measures like those. Because they probably think it will cost them money in the long run. I am not against gun ownership in fact I am thinking about getting my pistol permit. At least I would have a fighting chance if chaos broke out around me. My boss goes on vacation every year to yellowstone. He says everybody is packing heat in Wyoming. I think they have the loosest gun control laws in the country. You never see one of these shootings happen in Wyoming. The shooter would be dead before he could get a second round off. I am starting to think maybe the answer is that everybody carries a gun.
Prickly Pete Posted December 4, 2015 Posted December 4, 2015 (edited) Because they probably think it will cost them money in the long run. I am not against gun ownership in fact I am thinking about getting my pistol permit. At least I would have a fighting chance if chaos broke out around me. My boss goes on vacation every year to yellowstone. He says everybody is packing heat in Wyoming. I think they have the loosest gun control laws in the country. You never see one of these shootings happen in Wyoming. The shooter would be dead before he could get a second round off. I am starting to think maybe the answer is that everybody carries a gun. And then what if you are wrong? Know where else everybody is packing?....Places like Yemen. Yep, just walking around with their guns. It's a great vibe! And are you comfortable with EVERYONE, like even groups of minority teens (18), or "Middle Easterners" packing as you stroll through Target with your kids? And while one person with a gun to take out a crazed shooter would be nice, I'm not sure if I would feel safer if everyone in the area whips out a gun and starts shooting in a crowd. I'm okay with gun ownership, not okay with every place I go being filled with people and guns, just because there have been some mass shootings. It's really, really, really, really, really unlikely that I, or any of you, will be shot in some kind of "mass shooting", or even shot at all. Get a grip. Edited December 4, 2015 by HoF Watkins
What a Tuel Posted December 4, 2015 Posted December 4, 2015 (edited) And then what if you are wrong? Know where else everybody is packing?....Places like Yemen. Yep, just walking around with their guns. It's a great vibe! And are you comfortable with EVERYONE, like even groups of minority teens (18), or "Middle Easterners" packing as you stroll through Target with your kids? And while one person with a gun to take out a crazed shooter would be nice, I'm not sure if I would feel safer if everyone in the area whips out a gun and starts shooting in a crowd. I'm okay with gun ownership, not okay with every place I go being filled with people and guns, just because there have been some mass shootings. It's really, really, really, really, really unlikely that I, or any of you, will be shot in some kind of "mass shooting", or even shot at all. Get a grip. Far more likely to get injured or killed in a car accident than a mass shooting, but 350 mass shootings a year!!! OMG! We are all going to die! Mass panic! We need legislative decisions based out of emotion right now! Not prayers! But honestly not everyone should have a gun, and there should be background checks, but they need to knock of the rhetoric Edited December 4, 2015 by What a Tuel
Alaska Darin Posted December 4, 2015 Posted December 4, 2015 Because they probably think it will cost them money in the long run. I am not against gun ownership in fact I thinking about getting my pistol permit. At least I would have a fighting chance if chaos broke out around me. My boss goes on vacation every year to yellowstone. He says everybody is packing heat in Wyoming. I think they have the loosest gun control laws in the country. You never see one of these shootings happen in Wyoming. The shooter would be dead before he could get a second round off. I am starting to think maybe the answer is that everybody carries a gun. Alaska and New Hampshire have virtually no requirement for concealed carry. It's essentially: "Be a citizen and don't have a felony." No permit required. I would bet at any given time, in any given place, at least 25% of the people are carrying a gun. Some instances are much higher. At my last job the only person not regularly carrying on the staff was the administrative assistant.
Prickly Pete Posted December 5, 2015 Posted December 5, 2015 (edited) Alaska and New Hampshire have virtually no requirement for concealed carry. It's essentially: "Be a citizen and don't have a felony." No permit required. I would bet at any given time, in any given place, at least 25% of the people are carrying a gun. Some instances are much higher. At my last job the only person not regularly carrying on the staff was the administrative assistant. Please... the demographics of those states are much different from the more populated states. And Alaska's violent crime rate ain't nothin' to brag about either. http://www.cityrating.com/crime-statistics/alaska/ Edited December 5, 2015 by HoF Watkins
Alaska Darin Posted December 5, 2015 Posted December 5, 2015 Please... the demographics of those states are much different from the more populated states. And Alaska's violent crime rate ain't nothin' to brag about either. http://www.cityrating.com/crime-statistics/alaska/ One: I didn't say anything about demographics nor did anyone else. Two: I didn't make any comment about crime rates. I was simply pointing out that Alaska and New Hampshire have almost no concealed carry requirements. The vast majority of violent crime in Alaska (like pretty much everywhere else, I'd say), is committed by a tiny percentage of people. The "Native on Native" crime in the state is ridiculous and is at a rate that is exponentially higher than any average measure being used. It's also the most unique state, as there are so many villages that have clustered populations that are essentially left to police themselves because there are no roads, 80% unemployment, and no money for full time police officers. Alcoholism is rampant and that obviously leads to even more violent crime. It's a really weird dynamic because the property crime rate and murder/manslaughter rates are below the national average but the rape rate is off the charts (again, the "Native on Native" rate is a big contributor). http://www.salon.com/2014/02/04/alaskas_alarming_rape_epidemic/ I would say Anchorage is as safe as any city of similar size. There are places to avoid after dark and there is now gang activity, which is a pretty big change from 10 years ago. I think most of that has to do with the sheer amount of money that's in the region. Criminals tend to go where there's a good cash pipeline to tap into. The concealed carry law changed about 15 years ago (removing the permit requirement for concealed carry). I don't think it's affected the gun crime rate much either way because so many households here already owned guns and a high percentage of the population already had permits. That being said, I'd venture to guess there is a higher percentage of people carrying a gun in a grocery store in Anchorage than anywhere in the world.
Prickly Pete Posted December 5, 2015 Posted December 5, 2015 One: I didn't say anything about demographics nor did anyone else. Two: I didn't make any comment about crime rates. I was simply pointing out that Alaska and New Hampshire have almost no concealed carry requirements. The vast majority of violent crime in Alaska (like pretty much everywhere else, I'd say), is committed by a tiny percentage of people. The "Native on Native" crime in the state is ridiculous and is at a rate that is exponentially higher than any average measure being used. It's also the most unique state, as there are so many villages that have clustered populations that are essentially left to police themselves because there are no roads, 80% unemployment, and no money for full time police officers. Alcoholism is rampant and that obviously leads to even more violent crime. It's a really weird dynamic because the property crime rate and murder/manslaughter rates are below the national average but the rape rate is off the charts (again, the "Native on Native" rate is a big contributor). http://www.salon.com/2014/02/04/alaskas_alarming_rape_epidemic/ I would say Anchorage is as safe as any city of similar size. There are places to avoid after dark and there is now gang activity, which is a pretty big change from 10 years ago. I think most of that has to do with the sheer amount of money that's in the region. Criminals tend to go where there's a good cash pipeline to tap into. The concealed carry law changed about 15 years ago (removing the permit requirement for concealed carry). I don't think it's affected the gun crime rate much either way because so many households here already owned guns and a high percentage of the population already had permits. That being said, I'd venture to guess there is a higher percentage of people carrying a gun in a grocery store in Anchorage than anywhere in the world. So what was your point?
Recommended Posts