Orlando: Worst Mass Shooting In US History

[stevew]

At least 20 dead in an Orlando gay nightclub. Shooter wearing a bomb and armed with several assault weapons.

[stevew]

Also this happened nearby where a member of the 2014 Voice cast was targeted and murdered. But it looks like the incidents were not related.

[Edward64]

Pretty sad.

I'm sure the forthcoming details will be horrendous.

[EagleFan]

Saying 50 dead now.

[Dutch]

Holy hell.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Saying 50 dead now.

Holy crap, it was saying 20 earlier today.

[Neon_Chaos]

Orlando nightclub shooting: 50 killed in terror attack - CNN.com

50 dead, 53 injured.

[Thomkal]

my heart goes out to the victims and their families.

[Vince, Pt. II]

So sad

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by stevew

Holy crap, it was saying 20 earlier today.

This is one of the first times I ever remember in one of these mass shootings where the early reported number wasn't higher than the actual number. It was so surprising that the number nearly doubled when the official news conference happened. Crazy situation and so sad.

[stevew]

Shooter's father trying to play it off as an anti-gay hate crime rather than another "Islamic" fueled terror attack.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by stevew

Shooters father trying to play it off as an anti-gay hate crime rather than another "Islamic" fueled terror attack.

The thing is, with the Islamic views on homosexuality doesn't it pretty much fall into both categories. He hated homosexuality because of his Islamic fueled beliefs...?

[nol]

Relevant video: Obama to gun owners: I'm not looking to disarm you

What I have said is precisely what you suggested, which is, why don’t we treat this like every other thing that we use? I just came from a meeting today in the Situation Room in which I got people who we know have been on ISIL Web sites, living here in the United States, U.S. citizens, and we’re allowed to put them on the no-fly list when it comes to airlines, but because of the National Rifle Association, I cannot prohibit those people from buying a gun.

This is somebody who is a known ISIL sympathizer. And if he wants to walk in to a gun store or a gun show right now and buy as much — as many weapons and ammo as he can, nothing’s prohibiting him from doing that, even though the FBI knows who that person is.

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by stevew

Shooter's father trying to play it off as an anti-gay hate crime rather than another "Islamic" fueled terror attack.

[Easy Mac]

No, guys, all the Facebook posts say we can't discuss religion, guns, or bigotry when we discuss the shooting. Try to keep it on topic and save those conversations for the next time it's OK to talk about them.

[Ben E Lou]

Shooter called 911 and pledged allegiance to ISIS.

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by stevew

Shooter's father trying to play it off as an anti-gay hate crime rather than another "Islamic" fueled terror attack.

Good luck with that.

[stevew]

Someone apprehended by the Santa Monica PD, details not available atm.

[Ben E Lou]

And yes, ISIS is very anti-gay. "Both" seems like a very viable option here.

[SirFozzie]

I hope that this is just a case of very unfortunate timing, but considering the source, have a hard time believing it..

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick deletes "reap what you sow" tweet after mass shooting at LGBT club - Houston Chronicle

[tucker rocky]

Another senseless terror attack taking innocent lives.

Prayers to the lives lost.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by tucker rocky

Another senseless bombing taking innocent lives.

Prayers to the lives lost.

Where?

edit: The Shanghai airport story? Haven't seen any confirmed dead, just says 4 injured. Was there another bombing? or did the 4 (or some of the 4) not make it?

[EagleFan]

Holy crap...

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/12/us/cal...nal/index.html


What is wrong with people?

[Galaril]

Holy fuck. This wack job worked for a large global security firm G4S and he possibly was handling security in federal buildings and airport facilities . That and him being connected to ISIS is mind boggling.

[NobodyHere]

Religion of Peace strikes again

[TCY Junkie]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

I hope that this is just a case of very unfortunate timing, but considering the source, have a hard time believing it..

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick deletes "reap what you sow" tweet after mass shooting at LGBT club - Houston Chronicle

This is the dumbest thing I have ever read online.

[wustin]

How does a shitty state like Florida have next to no gun control laws. Not that it would matter for this incident anyways

[NobodyHere]

I'm pretty sure any mass murderer wouldn't hesitate in violating gun laws.

What gun laws would've prevented this shooting?

[BBT]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I'm pretty sure any mass murderer wouldn't hesitate in violating gun laws.

What gun laws would've prevented this shooting?

A law that wouldn't allow a person on FBI watch lists to purchase an AR-15 and a handgun LEGALLY would be a start.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I'm pretty sure any mass murderer wouldn't hesitate in violating gun laws.

What gun laws would've prevented this shooting?

By that logic why not permit the sale of RPGs and full machine guns?

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by BBT

A law that wouldn't allow a person on FBI watch lists to purchase an AR-15 and a handgun LEGALLY would be a start.

If you believe in guilty until proven innocent then sure.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

If you believe in guilty until proven innocent then sure.

Or if you believe in logic and common sense.

[tucker rocky]

Originally Posted by tucker rocky

Another senseless terror attack taking innocent lives.

Prayers to the lives lost.

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Where?

edit: The Shanghai airport story? Haven't seen any confirmed dead, just says 4 injured. Was there another bombing? or did the 4 (or some of the 4) not make it?

I meant terror attack, not bombing. My mistake.

I was reading a story about the Orlando shooter, and him referencing the Boston Bombing.

I realise it was a shooting and not a bombing.

I made an edit to my previous post.

[Edward64]

Going to cause another short term push for more gun control which will likely go no where.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/12/us/[email protected]

Shooting suspect bought two guns legally

Omar Mateen legally purchased a handgun and a long gun within the last few days, ATF Assistant Special Agent in Charge Trevor Velinor told reporters on Sunday.

"He is not a prohibited person," Velinor said.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Or if you believe in logic and common sense.

I don't think it's common sense to let the government arbitrarily take away rights.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I don't think it's common sense to let the government arbitrarily take away rights.

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

That's not some liberal anti-gun whackjob. That's from Antonin Scalia.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

That's not some liberal anti-gun whackjob. That's from Antonin Scalia.

I didn't see anything in there about the government arbitrarily taking away rights by putting someone's name on a secret list.

Also I'm not a fan of Scalia.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I don't think it's common sense to let the government arbitrarily take away rights.

I would agree with "arbitrarily." They shouldn't be able to just point at someone and say 'hey you you don't get to ______." That's one of my issues with the no-fly list. As currently constituted, you're legally not allowed to know that you're on it; because you're not permitted that knowledge, you lack the standing to challenge your status on that list, which means you can't see the evidence against you that led to that status in the first place.

Which is breathtakingly unconstitutional but PROTECT US FROM THE TERRISMS.

So, y'know, I don't want anything like that for a prospective "no-gun" list.

But here's another issue: federal background checks for gun purchases get 72 hours. If there's a red flag in your background that doesn't come up within 72 hours, you're legally allowed to purchase the firearm. So, if you have a situation like, say, the last 8 years where people are so freaked out that the secret Muslim is gonna take ALL the guns we better buy up MORE guns, you have a greater strain on the government's ability to conduct those checks.

Congress has to fund the ability to conduct those checks, and what Republican is going to vote for more money for, well, ANY gun measure that isn't "loosen restrictions" with the NRA glowering balefully at them?

And that's without even touching the concept of straw purchases or background checks for unlicensed sales. See, if selling guns is your primary business, you have to be licensed and conduct background checks. If it isn't...you don't. A Harvard study from last year (apparently still awaiting publication) suggests that potentially up to 22% of gun purchasers in 2015 had no background check performed. One in five. Would that have mattered here? Maybe. Maybe not. Can we tighten that up without "arbitrarily taking away rights"? I think so.

And that, to me, is the problem. There are things that can be done that would not materially impact the Second Amendment, but politicians on the right are so invested in GUNS = FREEDOM AND NRA DONOR CHECKS that even when 90% of the country supports something (like expanded background checks) they fight tooth and nail to prevent that thing from happening. And then they shrug their shoulders, say "there's literally not a thing we could do. not one thing. ever. It's beyond our control. #PrayFor______" and it makes me want to scream.

[Edward64]

Father sounds like a whack job himself.

Orlando suspect’s father hosted a TV show and now pretends to be Afghanistan’s president - The Washington Post

The father of Omar Mateen, identified by police as the man behind the carnage at an Orlando nightclub early Sunday morning, is an Afghan man who holds strong political views, including support for the Afghan Taliban. In a video he posted on Saturday, he appears to be portraying himself as the president of Afghanistan.

Seddique Mateen, who has been referred to as Mir Seddique in early news reports, hosted the “Durand Jirga Show” on a channel called Payam-e-Afghan, which broadcasts from California. In it, the elder Mateen speaks in the Dari language on a variety of political subjects. Dozens of videos are posted on a channel under Seddique Mateen's name on YouTube. A phone number and post office box that are displayed on the show were traced back to the Mateen home in Florida. Mateen also owns a nonprofit organization under the name Durand Jirga, which is registered in Port St. Lucie, Fla.

In one video, Mateen expresses gratitude toward the Afghan Taliban, while denouncing the Pakistani government.

“Our brothers in Waziristan, our warrior brothers in [the] Taliban movement and national Afghan Taliban are rising up,” he said. “Inshallah the Durand Line issue will be solved soon.”

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by tucker rocky

I meant terror attack, not bombing. My mistake.

I was reading a story about the Orlando shooter, and him referencing the Boston Bombing.

I realise it was a shooting and not a bombing.

I made an edit to my previous post.

Hoped that was the case but had me worried there was a bombing too. Then I saw the Shanghai thing, that was another odd story but last I saw no fatalities.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

I would agree with "arbitrarily." They shouldn't be able to just point at someone and say 'hey you you don't get to ______." That's one of my issues with the no-fly list. As currently constituted, you're legally not allowed to know that you're on it; because you're not permitted that knowledge, you lack the standing to challenge your status on that list, which means you can't see the evidence against you that led to that status in the first place.

Which is breathtakingly unconstitutional but PROTECT US FROM THE TERRISMS.

So, y'know, I don't want anything like that for a prospective "no-gun" list.

But here's another issue: federal background checks for gun purchases get 72 hours. If there's a red flag in your background that doesn't come up within 72 hours, you're legally allowed to purchase the firearm. So, if you have a situation like, say, the last 8 years where people are so freaked out that the secret Muslim is gonna take ALL the guns we better buy up MORE guns, you have a greater strain on the government's ability to conduct those checks.

Congress has to fund the ability to conduct those checks, and what Republican is going to vote for more money for, well, ANY gun measure that isn't "loosen restrictions" with the NRA glowering balefully at them?

And that's without even touching the concept of straw purchases or background checks for unlicensed sales. See, if selling guns is your primary business, you have to be licensed and conduct background checks. If it isn't...you don't. A Harvard study from last year (apparently still awaiting publication) suggests that potentially up to 22% of gun purchasers in 2015 had no background check performed. One in five. Would that have mattered here? Maybe. Maybe not. Can we tighten that up without "arbitrarily taking away rights"? I think so.

And that, to me, is the problem. There are things that can be done that would not materially impact the Second Amendment, but politicians on the right are so invested in GUNS = FREEDOM AND NRA DONOR CHECKS that even when 90% of the country supports something (like expanded background checks) they fight tooth and nail to prevent that thing from happening. And then they shrug their shoulders, say "there's literally not a thing we could do. not one thing. ever. It's beyond our control. #PrayFor______" and it makes me want to scream.

Great post and totally agree.

[thesloppy]

I'm unreasonably angered by the number of folks that I ostensibly agree with politically, who say they are really passionate about gun control, but haven't ever taken the five minutes necessary to figure out what "semi-automatic" means, spinning wild fantasies about machine guns....it's like listening to old folks make an argument about prohibition framed around smoking quaaludes.

[miami_fan]

And on the Left Coast, we escaped another massacre.

Man with weapons and potential explosives identified, 'wanted to harm' L.A. gay pride parade, chief says - LA Times

[digamma]

This is so heartbreaking. I'm really sad for everyone affected by this stupid, stupid tragedy.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BBT

A law that wouldn't allow a person on FBI watch lists to purchase an AR-15 and a handgun LEGALLY would be a start.

Even without a law, shouldn't the purchase throw up a flag at the FBI? Like a "hey this guy who has said bunch of stuff about killing people just bought a bunch of ammo and a big gun" type list. At worst you could interview the guy and see his frame of mind.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I didn't see anything in there about the government arbitrarily taking away rights by putting someone's name on a secret list.

Also I'm not a fan of Scalia.

Don't make it arbitrary. Law enforcement brings evidence to a Judge who signs off on it. Individual can appeal that decision if they feel it was not legit.

[RainMaker]

Nutty family

Orlando suspect’s father hosted a TV show and now pretends to be Afghanistan’s president - The Washington Post

[RainMaker]

Hillary Clinton on Twitter: ""Let’s be clear: Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.""

Tell this to homosexuals.

[MrBug708]

Orlando: AR-15
Aurora: AR-15
Sandy Hook: AR-15
San Bernardino: AR-15
Umpqua Community College: AR-15

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Orlando: AR-15
Aurora: AR-15
Sandy Hook: AR-15
San Bernardino: AR-15
Umpqua Community College: AR-15

For whatever it's worth the weapon usage stats have been pretty consistent in all of these mass shootings to that of regular shootings, with assault weapons involved in ~25%, high-capacity magazines in ~10%, and handguns in ~50%. Regardless, I feel like the whole 'assault weapons' narrative is crucially flawed because it implies that if these crimes were committed with some other type of gun, a (ostensibly) lower body count would somehow be more acceptable. Though these guys sometimes have assault weapons, they always have handguns too, usually multiple, and sometimes with high-capacity magazines (and sometimes bombs too, as in this case.)

The non-availability of an AR-15 or any other assault weapon wasn't going to change this guy's mind or plan in the slightest...it was just going to make him do it with more handguns, which may not have been as comfortable or frugal, but has unfortunately been proven just as effective, time and time again.

Assault weapons likely do make these kind of mass killings a little easier, but they are by no means a necessary part, and banning them entirely wouldn't do anything to change the frequency or occurrence of these acts (although it might lower the body count). I think 'assault weapons' are just something gun nuts like to buy because they look scary, and similarly news anchors like to say 'assault weapons!' because they look AND sound scary, but they're really not all that remarkable in their neutered civilian version, especially as long as there's a million models of high-capacity, semi-automatic handguns (and/or hunting rifles, shotguns, etc.) available to take their place.