Amazed and elated that a major publication had the balls to put this on their cover.

http://cdn.thedailybeast.com/content/dailybeast/cheats/2015/12/02/daily-news-slams-gop-on-san-bernardino/jcr:content/image.crop.800.500.jpg/48303639.cached.jpg

We don't just need prayers, we need to actually do something about this.

And the follow up. Equally provoking.

http://www.nydailynews.com/cmlink/nydn.CoverContent?newsletter=true&ctype=front&cdate=20151204&dt=landscape_235_300

Equally disgusting is more accurate.

Kelroy, EO, etc...you are smart enough to be able to tell the difference between the killers in Planned Parenthood offices, schools or movie theaters vs. radical Islam. Most of the cases you listed earlier were simply mental cases who had nothing to do with the Christian religion. I suspect the PP guy will turn out to have some religious foundation but considering the undisputable fact that an abortion is killing a baby human, one can see a purely moral basis, too ( be clear that I don't condone this and believe abortion is a regrettable necessity at times). However, few, if any of the school shooter or business shooters you listed had any sort of Christian religious background. No organized or legitimate Christian group has condoned random mass killings and no organized Christian group has carried out the mass killings of recent years. The only major incidences will be those isolated apocalyptic groups who kept their deaths within the groups. Islamist terrorists, conversely, are very organised and are widely accepted in certain areas of the world, now, including Syria. You seem to be lumping all killers with Anglo-sounding names into the "Christian" pot when virtually all can been tied to mental illness and have zero religious foundation. When someone says they are Jesus Christ then kills somebody, thats likely mental illness, not some sort of radicalized Christianist. Just because the killers name is Jim Smith doesn't mean his act has anything to do with Christianity.

TLDR: Killer named Smith = no religious affiliation, only mental illness; killer named Muhammad = 100% religious radical

Move along. No racism here at all. Very glad we do not have worry about that darn radical Christianists!

So, he should be watching the Feds?

The more likely scenario would be him watching "Bubba".

Not to sure about this statement - over 3,000 died on 9/11 alone...

True but the vast majority of terrorist attacks in the US are by non Muslim.

Kelroy, EO, etc...you are smart enough to be able to tell the difference between the killers in Planned Parenthood offices, schools or movie theaters vs. radical Islam. Most of the cases you listed earlier were simply mental cases who had nothing to do with the Christian religion. I suspect the PP guy will turn out to have some religious foundation but considering the undisputable fact that an abortion is killing a baby human, one can see a purely moral basis, too ( be clear that I don't condone this and believe abortion is a regrettable necessity at times). However, few, if any of the school shooter or business shooters you listed had any sort of Christian religious background. No organized or legitimate Christian group has condoned random mass killings and no organized Christian group has carried out the mass killings of recent years. The only major incidences will be those isolated apocalyptic groups who kept their deaths within the groups. Islamist terrorists, conversely, are very organised and are widely accepted in certain areas of the world, now, including Syria. You seem to be lumping all killers with Anglo-sounding names into the "Christian" pot when virtually all can been tied to mental illness and have zero religious foundation. When someone says they are Jesus Christ then kills somebody, thats likely mental illness, not some sort of radicalized Christianist. Just because the killers name is Jim Smith doesn't mean his act has anything to do with Christianity.

We are talking about terrorism and the PP shootings are terrorism. Some of you seem to making excuses for the non-Muslim acts of terrorism.

And the follow up. Equally provoking.

http://www.nydailynews.com/cmlink/nydn.CoverContent?newsletter=true&ctype=front&cdate=20151204&dt=landscape_235_300

Let's be real here; that's not journalism. That's unapologetic propaganda. It's like Bizarro-O'Reilly level nonsense.

The violence at PP is terrorism. The shootings at schools and in the movie theater do not seem to be politically motivated, so do not fall under terrorism as defined by the FBI.


Definitions of Terrorism in the U.S. Code

18 U.S.C. § 2331 defines "international terrorism" and "domestic terrorism" for purposes of Chapter 113B of the Code, entitled "Terrorism”:

"International terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:

Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
Occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.*

"Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:
Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and
Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.

18 U.S.C. § 2332b defines the term "federal crime of terrorism" as an offense that:
Is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct; and
Is a violation of one of several listed statutes, including § 930(c) (relating to killing or attempted killing during an attack on a federal facility with a dangerous weapon); and § 1114 (relating to killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the U.S.).
* FISA defines "international terrorism" in a nearly identical way, replacing "primarily" outside the U.S. with "totally" outside the U.S. 50 U.S.C. § 1801(c).

Is anyone even disputing that the Planned Parenthood attacks are terrorism? Even people running for the Republican ticket have called it as much.

... the undisputable fact that an abortion is killing a baby human, ...

That's not an undisputable (or indisputable) fact. Just wanted to put that out there, but that's a whole other thread...

The country would have been off had we followed the lead of Canada and Australia and remained under the Crown.

I dont like driving on the other side of the road. :)

nm

Kelroy, EO, etc...you are smart enough to be able to tell the difference between the killers in Planned Parenthood offices, schools or movie theaters vs. radical Islam. Most of the cases you listed earlier were simply mental cases who had nothing to do with the Christian religion. I suspect the PP guy will turn out to have some religious foundation but considering the undisputable fact that an abortion is killing a baby human, one can see a purely moral basis, too ( be clear that I don't condone this and believe abortion is a regrettable necessity at times). However, few, if any of the school shooter or business shooters you listed had any sort of Christian religious background. No organized or legitimate Christian group has condoned random mass killings and no organized Christian group has carried out the mass killings of recent years. The only major incidences will be those isolated apocalyptic groups who kept their deaths within the groups. Islamist terrorists, conversely, are very organised and are widely accepted in certain areas of the world, now, including Syria. You seem to be lumping all killers with Anglo-sounding names into the "Christian" pot when virtually all can been tied to mental illness and have zero religious foundation. When someone says they are Jesus Christ then kills somebody, thats likely mental illness, not some sort of radicalized Christianist. Just because the killers name is Jim Smith doesn't mean his act has anything to do with Christianity.

I'm not sure radical Islam has much to do with Islam either, Killers sometimes kill under the guise of religion, but they're basically using it as an excuse to justify psychopathy. Are all the men who lynched African Americans, beat and tortured them Christians? They would tell you they were. But they were really just psychopaths. Psychopaths have no real religion.

Kelroy, EO, etc...ou are smart enough to be able to tell the difference between the killers in Planned Parenthood offices, schools or movie theaters vs. radical Isla.
What does this have to do with me? I've not referenced any of these groups.

I get it though. I am a "type", not an actual person to many on this forum. When a person does not conform to the strict tenants of the other group, they become the Dehumanized "other". Leftists, liberals, terrorists, and anybody else that doesn't fall into lockstep with the "real Americans" are all part of the same group.

http://2v7fdhblamx236owi3dpih4l.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/21.jpg

This is the lady. Man, if I was married to someone who looked like that, I'd want to die too. Maybe this was just his cry for help.

What does this have to do with me? I've not referenced any of these groups.

I get it though. I am a "type", not an actual person to many on this forum. When a person does not conform to the strict tenants of the other group, they become the Dehumanized "other". Leftists, liberals, terrorists, and anybody else that doesn't fall into lockstep with the "real Americans" are all part of the same group.

Funny, you have no problem painting with that same broad brush with your usual accusations of racism.....

We are talking about terrorism and the PP shootings are terrorism. Some of you seem to making excuses for the non-Muslim acts of terrorism.

Who is saying that? One would logically think that there are more cases because there are more non-muslims in this country. I am making the point that few non-Muslim mass-killing incidences are committed by some hard-line Christian zealot. Even the PP killer will likely turn out to be a mental case. Our politicians,eft and right, won't fund mental health care better and the left won't allow those who clearly have mental health issues to be forced off the streets. Gun-ownership isn't going away. Now we have avowed Islamist zealots who are next to impossible to find but who are bent on mass carnage - their own families apparently cant even see it. The action that needs to be taken is to stop the influx until we can get under control the ability to weed out the ones who have become fanaticized. We also have to be willing to examine if freedom of speech allows speech that condones the mass killings and the destruction of the country. You can say it is a minute fraction, but that minute fraction can cause mayhem.

TLDR: Killer named Smith = no religious affiliation, only mental illness; killer named Muhammad = 100% religious radical

Move along. No racism here at all. Very glad we do not have worry about that darn radical Christianists!

Well, I think a rational person can find a difference between a killer who happens to be Christian or Muslim, and is performing a mass murder of some sort for personal reasons, and a Christian or Muslim who is performing a mass murder in the name of Christianity or Islam. They both happen, however the former rarely happens in the US. The latter, more so.

I'm no expert but I think telling kids to go after the gunman during an active shooting is not a smart idea.

A Fox & Friends demonstration where children neutralized a gunman during an active shooter situation offered dubious advice to parents, as experts emphasize that confronting the gunman should be "a last resort."

The Fox News segment never explained that in an active shooter situation people should prioritize escaping and hiding over physically confronting the gunman -- only mentioning the first two actions in passing -- and instead emphasized engaging the gunman in a physical confrontation.

The December 8 broadcast of Fox & Friends featured two krav maga instructors and three children who demonstrated martial arts techniques that could be used to disarm an active shooter.

Co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck introduced the segment saying, "In an active shooter situation five seconds can mean the difference between life and death. But there are some things that you can do, and your children can do, to make a difference" before asking the instructor to "display for us and exemplify what would happen in an armed shooter situation." The instructor then used a stapler as a prop while his co-instructor demonstrated how to disarm a gunman from behind.

Fox Talkers Tell Kids To Rush Active Shooters | Crooks and Liars (http://crooksandliars.com/2015/12/fox-talkers-tell-kids-rush-active-shooters)

I'm no expert but I think telling kids to go after the gunman during an active shooting is not a smart idea.

A Fox & Friends demonstration where children neutralized a gunman during an active shooter situation offered dubious advice to parents, as experts emphasize that confronting the gunman should be "a last resort."

The Fox News segment never explained that in an active shooter situation people should prioritize escaping and hiding over physically confronting the gunman -- only mentioning the first two actions in passing -- and instead emphasized engaging the gunman in a physical confrontation.

The December 8 broadcast of Fox & Friends featured two krav maga instructors and three children who demonstrated martial arts techniques that could be used to disarm an active shooter.

Co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck introduced the segment saying, "In an active shooter situation five seconds can mean the difference between life and death. But there are some things that you can do, and your children can do, to make a difference" before asking the instructor to "display for us and exemplify what would happen in an armed shooter situation." The instructor then used a stapler as a prop while his co-instructor demonstrated how to disarm a gunman from behind.

Fox Talkers Tell Kids To Rush Active Shooters | Crooks and Liars (http://crooksandliars.com/2015/12/fox-talkers-tell-kids-rush-active-shooters)

If you can't get away, then you should rush the subject he or she can't kill everyone, Just think if the people on the planes during 911 had been as brave as the passengers in Pennsylvania ,the world trade centers might still be standing....... Or you could just stand there and get killed while pissing your pants.....Or you could be a cc holder and shot back, i like those odds a little better.....

Who is saying that? One would logically think that there are more cases because there are more non-muslims in this country. I am making the point that few non-Muslim mass-killing incidences are committed by some hard-line Christian zealot. Even the PP killer will likely turn out to be a mental case. Our politicians,eft and right, won't fund mental health care better and the left won't allow those who clearly have mental health issues to be forced off the streets. Gun-ownership isn't going away. Now we have avowed Islamist zealots who are next to impossible to find but who are bent on mass carnage - their own families apparently cant even see it. The action that needs to be taken is to stop the influx until we can get under control the ability to weed out the ones who have become fanaticized. We also have to be willing to examine if freedom of speech allows speech that condones the mass killings and the destruction of the country. You can say it is a minute fraction, but that minute fraction can cause mayhem.

If we have to be willing to examine freedom of speech (which already has restrictions), then we should be willing to examine the 2nd Amendment too. That's what is so ridiculous about all the extreme reactions to questions of how much freedom the 2nd Amendment allows. First of all, it doesn't even address private gun ownership for anything other than participation in a militia. Secondly, we have had no problem placing restrictions on the Bill of Rights where it affects public safety. The "You can't yell fire in a crowded theatre" restriction on freedom of speech is just one example. Gun manufacturers are driving this whole justification for lack of restrictions and they function very much like the cigarette manufacturers. They could care less about death rates. They're all about profit margins. They and the NRA are putting legalized bribes(that's all lobbying really is) in the pockets of our Congressmen. To quote my son: "The country got tired of bribery scandals in Congress so they just made it legal." While we will never get rid of gun ownership in this country, we can make it a tiny bit safer for private citizens by increasing restrictions on who can buy and what we sell. I'm OK, although I can't understand it, with guns for hunting and marksmanship, owned by responsible owners. I'm not OK with stupid white rednecks carrying guns in Walmart and restaurants. I'm not OK with assault rifles being readily available and high capacity magazines being readily available, just like I'm not OK with freedom of speech without conditions.

If you can't get away, then you should rush the subject he or she can't kill everyone, Just think if the people on the planes during 911 had been as brave as the passengers in Pennsylvania ,the world trade centers might still be standing....... Or you could just stand there and get killed while pissing your pants.....Or you could be a cc holder and shot back, i like those odds a little better.....

9/11 references like that are misleading. Before 9/11, most hijackings ended with ransom payments and freeing of hostages. We have no idea what the passengers saw, for the most part. It's like bank robberies, you might think it's a great chance to be a hero, but the overwhelming majority of the time, the robbers leave the bank, don't harm anyone, and are caught later by authorities.

Isn't it about time to move this thread to Politics?

Wow Betts. Stupid white rednecks......a very disappointing and totally ignorant statement by you. Check out videos of some of the recent Black Lives Matter - type protests. Quite a number of Blacks with guns. I bet if you asked around, you might even find a bunch of Hispanics and Asians who CC, too. Dont tell anyone but I have several female, white, multi-degreed management level friends who CC and really enjoy the shooting range. Even your party-line talking-point generalized statements show a lack of knowledge. Thats OK. I dont understand the desire for semi-automatics either but it is their right. It has been upheld at every level and it's not going away. Its far from being driven by gun manufacturers. Its driven by demand of the public. You may not be part of that public which is fine. Can there be adjustments? Sure. But much of the opposition comes from the belief that if you see tightening of one thing, there will be another, then another. Before someone brings up the no fly list issue POTUS broght up, there are thousands on that list who are normal, law-abiding persons. I have a brother on the list who is there simply because his name is the same as someone suspected of something many years ago. He's learned how to manage it but he's there despite a clean legal record. This is proof that if the government could be trusted to be responsible, POTUS might be right. But the reality is, government cannot be trusted and people like my brother cannot be denied their right to protect their families.

Isn't it about time to move this thread to Politics?

LOL, I have thought the same thing about the convention center thread at times.