Discussion
  • Read More
    ArjakJordan Sargent
    6/12/16 10:14am

    Gawker - distraught that it wasn’t a white guy.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Flying Squid (I hate me more than you do.)Arjak
      6/12/16 10:19am

      I don’t see anyone distraught that it isn’t a white guy. Can you please point out the person who is distraught over that?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      EvanrudeJohnsonFlying Squid (I hate me more than you do.)
      6/12/16 10:23am

      I’m pretty sure that dude in the other thread who now owes every $20 is distraught. He bet that it would be a white dude.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    thebillplease1Jordan Sargent
    6/12/16 10:21am

    Perhaps, finally Lefties will start treating Islamic terrorism on home soil with some gravity.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      thebillplease1thebillplease1
      6/12/16 10:22am

      Islamophobia versus Homophobia for the belt.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      mawsim3thebillplease1
      6/12/16 10:25am

      Islamophobia has nothing on Homophobia when it comes to scale.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    The Noble RenardJordan Sargent
    6/12/16 10:17am

    Ugh, parents are Afghani immigrants. Well, that just handed Trump some rocket fuel. Goddamn it.

    This whole situation is awful :(

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      puncha yo bunsThe Noble Renard
      6/12/16 10:19am

      It’s hilarious that domestic terrorism from an American citizen just, you know...exercising his 2nd Amendment rights would give Trump any sort of ammunition for the general. But yet, here we are.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      GregSamsaThe Noble Renard
      6/12/16 10:20am

      Piffle. He’d first need to acknowledge gay people are human too.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    GrumpyEagleJordan Sargent
    6/12/16 11:05am

    Another mass shooting incident starring an AR-15. Is there any useful purpose behind these things? Anything practical? If you’re a “responsible gun owner” and “sportsman”, why should you have any problem enacting a ban on these?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      OnenessOnenessOnenessGrumpyEagle
      6/12/16 12:31pm

      Unfortunately, because there are enough of these things out there already that a ban now would mean that the meek would be prevented from getting them. I know that that’s ultimately sad and terrible, but it’s the reality when so many are already in the hands of gangs, regardless of whether ISIS, crips, or white supremacists.

      We do, however, need to try to limit the ability of nut cases to get them, but that’s difficult when they have no record, like that Uber driver who killed all those folks.

      Ultimately, the only solution is to have real communities where diversity is preached, accepted and lived and we stand guard against those who mean harm, regardless of their twisted reasons.

      The gun genie is already out of the bottle, unfortunately.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      GrumpyEagleOnenessOnenessOneness
      6/12/16 1:50pm

      However, it’s difficult to find the “nut cases” and doing so would require massive amounts of money and cultural change. Getting the arms manufacturers to stop selling for the broad consumer market might be an easier process. And it's far better for them to take on the initiative to do it themselves rather than wait until the government steps in and does it for them. After all, aren't these gun people supposed to stand for responsibility?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    The Dread & Fear of KingsJordan Sargent
    6/12/16 10:15am

    Is it finally time to say a big FUCK YOU to the NRA and make murder illegal once and for all at both the federal and state levels? If not now, when?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      pork tomatoThe Dread & Fear of Kings
      6/12/16 10:16am

      lol because that worked in france and belgium. this fucker was wearing a suicide vest too.

      put your self importance and political bias aside for a second and ask yourself the more important question.

      not how but why.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Flying Squid (I hate me more than you do.)The Dread & Fear of Kings
      6/12/16 10:17am

      Good thing ‘murder’ is the only law we need and it always gets the guilty man...

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    KumichoJordan Sargent
    6/12/16 10:36am

    Well, the guy’s parents were from Afghanistan, so I’m guessing he’s going to be on the lower-end of this chart...

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      OrangeFantaMustardRaceKumicho
      6/12/16 10:41am

      He literally had a suicide vest.

      Also this semantics bs is stupid, pls stop.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      YouBlinkedKumicho
      6/12/16 10:44am

      If we are talking about religious terrorism, then that’s a handy cheat sheet because it’s accurate.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Vox PopulistJordan Sargent
    6/12/16 10:21am

    It was just a matter of time until someone reenacted the Bataclan attack from Paris last year. There’s almost no defense against this, especially when the terrorist has “no criminal record” and hasn’t been on the radar of the intelligence services before.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      KinjagramModelVox Populist
      6/12/16 10:32am

      none. If they can stay under the radar and work mostly alone, no counter measures exist for it. That’s scary.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Vox PopulistKinjagramModel
      6/12/16 11:04am

      I’d like to point out that the Paris and Bruxelles terrorists were well known to the authorities, but even that didn’t prevent the attacks. As it takes about two dozen cops to permanently monitor a single suspect, the manpower to monitor everyone simply isn’t there. The British MI5 (domestic intelligence agency) recently admitted that they can’t monitor more than 50 suspects at any given time. And most countries in Western Europe have hundreds of these terrorism suspects plus hundreds more that recently returned from their “vacations” in Syria.

      Thus any politician who claims they can completely protect us against terrorists is lying.

      That is why we need to look a lot more into what makes these people become terrorists in the first place. Why the fuck for instance do we support and arm the most backwards islamist regime in the world - Saudi Arabia - even though we know precisely that they are the main driving force behind the spread of radical, stone-age Islam throughout the world?

      Now are our leaders simply stupid, or may there be another reason why they do something so seemingly counterproductive? Who benefits from this climate of fear and anger?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    rickjamesmdJordan Sargent
    6/12/16 10:28am

    Liberals have been whitewashing Muslim bigotry towards homosexuality for decades. They have used multiculturalism and cultural relativism as a shield to deflect from the inherent bigotry that Islam and the majority of Muslims have towards the LGBT community.

    Super majority of Muslims globally and especially in the west have opposed to any form of gay equality, they consider it a choice and a sinful bad choice that deserves severe punishment.

    It will be very interested how Liberalism will discuss this incident considering the attacker appears to the Muslim terrorist and the victims appears to be LGBT.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      enceldus28rickjamesmd
      6/12/16 10:59am

      It will be almost like liberals will talk about it without bigotry, racism and hate. You know like an adult.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      the johnrickjamesmd
      6/12/16 11:00am

      It will be interesting to see how conservatives will discuss this incident considering the targets were all part of a group they view as undeserving of civil rights, but then so too was the shooter. Interesting indeed!

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Zsa Zsa GaborgJordan Sargent
    6/12/16 10:14am

    Oh goodie, now we can all focus our energy on religion instead of gun control.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      allensmitheeZsa Zsa Gaborg
      6/12/16 10:15am

      By energy you mean typing?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      ButchyWoodchainZsa Zsa Gaborg
      6/12/16 10:16am

      Kill your religion. Then maybe we don’t need the gun.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    The Original SunshineJordan Sargent
    6/12/16 10:35am

    50 people. That’s a lot of people. We are never going to look at mass shootings. Why are the press calling it “Just a hate crime” if it turns out that this guy wasn’t a radical Islamist.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      TheDogIsStillBarkingThe Original Sunshine
      6/12/16 10:48am

      Was someone really calling it “just a hate crime”? Even before it was announced who the shooter was, it was referred to as domestic terrorism by any outlet I saw.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      The Original SunshineTheDogIsStillBarking
      6/12/16 11:13am

      Yes, after they spoke to the parents and it was suggested that he was angry seeing two men kissing, I heard one of the reporters one person on the air said the words “just a hate crime” as opposed to terrorism. Other friends of mine have noted the same thing.

      Reply
      <