Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Mass shooting in Orlando Nightclub

1…1516182021…73

Comments

  • #512
    rjpf1980
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭rjpf1980


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Probably an AR-16 and a sh*tload of 30 round clips. Some police forces wanted to ban them in favour of the 10 round clip, but the NRA objected as usual.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-12-16/ban-on-30-round-gun-magazines-in-connecticut-died-after-pressure

    Do you really think an Islamic extremist is going to obey the law and not get his hands on an illegal AR-15 and illegal 30 round magazines?


  • #513
    Matt Markinson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 107 ✭✭Matt Markinson


    Severard wrote: »
    The majority of crimes commited with guns is from gang-related [2]. When you manage to figure out keeping guns out of the hands of people who should not be having them in the first place that would be great. But to take away rights from people who are not criminals in the vain hope that it might stop actual criminals from gun violence is rather short-sighted.

    Criminals don't carry out massacres of the public in schools, concerts and nightclubs.
    The majority of public gun massacres in schools, cinemas, towns etc. from Dunblane to Hungerford, to Columbine to name just a few, were all carried with legally held firearms.


  • #514
    Jimmy Garlic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,331 ✭✭✭Jimmy Garlic


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Maybe read back a few pages and you will see the condemnation from them, Or are you one of these chaps that insists each and every one of the billion+ Muslims apologises individually for the actions of a few?

    I have seen all those kind of statements before, disingenuous tokenism. A billion or so Muslims and no mass movement against this kind of stuff.


  • #515
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,292 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Jimmy Garlic wrote: »
    I have seen all those kind of statements before, disingenuous tokenism. A billion or so Muslims and no mass movement against this kind of stuff.

    Because the majority of those Billion Muslims have probably not even heard about this :rolleyes:


  • #516
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,896 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    rjpf1980 wrote: »
    Do you really think an Islamic extremist is going to obey the law and not get his hands on an illegal AR-15 and illegal 30 round magazines?

    Classic NRA twaddle. Oppose ANY measure to stop these incidences occurring. How do you know the weapons were illegally obtained?


  • Advertisement
  • #517
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Because the majority of those Billion Muslims have probably not even heard about this :rolleyes:

    Of course they have.


  • #518
    rjpf1980
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭rjpf1980


    Matt Markinson wrote: »
    Criminals don't carry out massacres of the public in schools, concerts and nightclubs.
    The majority of public gun massacres in schools, cinemas, towns etc. from Dunblane to Hungerford, to Columbine to name just a few, were all carried with legally held firearms.

    This was nothing like the massacres you listed which were perpetrated by lone nuts with no political agenda.

    This was a terrorist attack by an Islamic extremist linked to ISIS. It was an act of war by a terrorist state against the United States.


  • #519
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    JPNelsforearm wrote: »
    No it shows the difference between localised violence that has existed for hundreds of years and is related to independance and IMPORTED Islamic terrorism, which is a much bigger problem, as it is not local, there is no rationality behind it, no negotiation.
    Most of the Belgian and Paris attackers were from Belgium and France, so your point makes no sense.

    If you want to claim it is because ancestors of theirs moved here in the past, then it applies to absolutely everyone unless you want to go back to an exact starting point where Europe 'began'. So where is this point in time, what year is it?


  • #520
    muddypaws
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,616 ✭✭✭muddypaws


    rjpf1980 wrote: »
    Nobody is witch hunting Muslims.
    We should be witch hunting Islamic extremists.



    Military force was used against the IRA which forced them to choose a democratic route and give up the gun.

    Military force is needed to wipe out Islamic terrorists and force Islamic extremists in general to moderate their views.



    Who is tarring a feathering all Muslims? Nobody. You are just deflecting from admitting 1) Islamic extremism is the leading terrorist threat right now 2) A brutal fight is ahead if the global Islamic extremist movement is to be stopped.


    You still haven't told us what happened in London on 7/11


  • #521
    Superhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 848 ✭✭✭Superhorse


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    LMAO :pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

    Nice mature response.


  • Advertisement
  • #522
    Samaris
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,544 ✭✭✭Samaris


    rjpf1980 wrote: »
    Nobody is witch hunting Muslims.
    We should be witch hunting Islamic extremists.
    I agree. But the people who are going on about all the Muslims should be deported and where are the muslims speaking against this (conveniently ignoring all the examples) are indeed trying to start a witch-hunt.


    rjpf1980 wrote: »
    Military force was used against the IRA which forced them to choose a democratic route and give up the gun.
    It didn't work all that well, but that's neither here nor there. I don't say that it shouldn't be used. If military force hadn't been used against ISIL in the Middle East, they'd still be taking over large chunks of Syria, the Lebanon, etcetera. It'd be quite a bit harder to get support (bar from the lunatic fringe) for carpet-bombing areas of European or American cities where Muslim people tend to live.
    rjpf1980 wrote: »
    Military force is needed to wipe out Islamic terrorists and force Islamic extremists in general to moderate their views.
    Oh, it won't make them moderate their views. They're nutbags, zealots. Wiping them out IS probably the only thing to do.


    rjpf1980 wrote: »
    Who is tarring a feathering all Muslims? Nobody. You are just deflecting from admitting 1) Islamic extremism is the leading terrorist threat right now 2) A brutal fight is ahead if the global Islamic extremist movement is to be stopped.

    See the answer to the first part. Yes, there are plenty of people calling for extreme retribution against "Muslims" in general.

    I do not disagree that Islamic extremism is the leading terrorist threat in this part of the world right now. I do disagree with playing right into ISIS' hands by encouraging, enforcing the isolation and mistreatment of ordinary Muslims which will drive the young, impressionable and stupid towards the extremists.

    Yes, a brutal fight is still ahead. But it must be targeted correctly, or else that brutal fight will wear on for another few generations and I really don't think that anyone wants that.


  • #523
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Before being given piles of condemnations and quotes...
    Jimmy Garlic wrote: »
    The stony silence from muslims when things like this happen, you could hear a pin drop. Where is the condemnation? Islam shouldn't be tolerated as long as mainstream Muslims tolerate extremism and consent to it with their silence.

    And after...
    Jimmy Garlic wrote: »
    I have seen all those kind of statements before, disingenuous tokenism. A billion or so Muslims and no mass movement against this kind of stuff.

    Stop talking out of your arse, Jimmy.


  • #524
    LightsStillOn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 798 ✭✭✭LightsStillOn


    Jimmy Garlic wrote: »
    I have seen all those kind of statements before, disingenuous tokenism. A billion or so Muslims and no mass movement against this kind of stuff.

    Wait, so let me get this straight.

    Muslims come out and condemn the violence = disingenuous tokenism

    Muslims keep quiet and say nothing = the silence speaks volumes

    Logic.


  • #525
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,292 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Superhorse wrote: »
    Nice mature response.

    It's all your idiotic post deserved.


  • #526
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Classic NRA twaddle. Oppose ANY measure to stop these incidences occurring. How do you know the weapons were illegally obtained?

    The ATF are saying they were bought legally in the last week.


  • #527
    Matt Markinson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 107 ✭✭Matt Markinson


    rjpf1980 wrote: »
    This was nothing like the massacres you listed which were perpetrated by lone nuts with no political agenda.

    This was a terrorist attack by an Islamic extremist linked to ISIS. It was an act of war by a terrorist state against the United States.

    And yet most such massacres to date have in fact been carried out by legally held firearms.


  • #528
    Samaris
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,544 ✭✭✭Samaris


    Jimmy Garlic wrote: »
    I have seen all those kind of statements before, disingenuous tokenism. A billion or so Muslims and no mass movement against this kind of stuff.

    Ah, there we go.

    "Where are the Muslims decrying this!"

    "Well, they don't count!"


  • #529
    Severard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 126 ✭✭Severard


    Deleted User wrote: »
    22 March 2016?

    That's the sad thing with all the attacks in recent years, is'nt it? In my original post to you I wasn't referring to THAT terrorist attack in Brussels.


  • #530
    Jimmy Garlic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,331 ✭✭✭Jimmy Garlic


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    Because the majority of those Billion Muslims have probably not even heard about this :rolleyes:

    Muslims don't use televisions, radios, mobile phones, or computers? You're delusional. There is no mass movement within Islam that condemns these atrocities, and that is a fact.


  • #531
    MarkAnthony
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,934 ✭✭✭MarkAnthony


    Tipperary Fairy wrote: »
    I'm not pro guns, but tbf there's like 300 million people in the US, so, ya know, it's all relative.



  • Advertisement
  • #532
    Polo_Mint
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,504 ✭✭✭Polo_Mint


    Jimmy Garlic wrote: »
    In other words, nothing to see here, move along. Islam is a religion of peace and anyone who thinks otherwise is racist/Islamophobic blah blah blah. The usual old tripe.

    Do you think Christianity is a religion of peace?


  • #533
    stefanovich
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,490 ✭✭✭stefanovich


    LightsStillOn wrote: »
    Wait, so let me get this straight.

    Muslims come out and condemn the violence = disingenuous tokenism

    Muslims keep quiet and say nothing = the silence speaks volumes

    Logic.

    Check out the silence here:
    http://www.ummah.com/forum/

    These are the moderates. Hot topics are demons, child marriage, subjecting non muslims to sharia. There seems to be a high level of mental illness in that online community which I hope to god is not representative.


  • #534
    Jimmy Garlic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,331 ✭✭✭Jimmy Garlic


    Polo_Mint wrote: »
    Do you think Christianity is a religion of peace?

    Absolutely not, but it has moved on from it's dark age origins, Islam hasn't.


  • #535
    JPNelsforearm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,147 ✭✭✭JPNelsforearm


    Matt Markinson wrote: »
    And yet most such massacres to date have in fact been carried out by legally held firearms.

    The Islamic terrorist attacks committed in Paris were carried out using assault rifles, on a continent with some of the strictest gun laws, its not a gun control issue.


  • #536
    Matt Markinson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 107 ✭✭Matt Markinson


    stefanovich wrote: »
    Check out the silence here:[/URL]

    These are the moderates. Hot topics are demons, child marriage, subjecting non muslims to sharia. There seems to be a high level of mental illness in that online community which I hope to god is not representative.

    The exact same was said about Irish people by those with an anti-Irish agenda when IRA terrorists and cowards were busy murdering innocent civilians.


  • #537
    Severard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 126 ✭✭Severard


    Matt Markinson wrote: »
    Because the chances of success are still less
    All terrorist targets are soft by their very nature.
    But some are a lot a softer than others.
    The attack in the niteclub, or any where else it's not expected, is getting just as much coverage and creating just as much, if not more, terrorism as any attack at the Euro's would.

    Al-Shabaab would disagree on that. In January of this year they attacked an army base and killed over 100 soldiers. A base with that many toops is anything but soft.

    https://somalianewsroom.com/2016/04/11/video-al-shabaab-release-film-of-mass-raid-attack-on-kenyan-forces/


  • #538
    Superhorse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 848 ✭✭✭Superhorse


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    It's all your idiotic post deserved.

    Ah as I thought unable to expand.


  • #539
    rjpf1980
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 387 ✭✭rjpf1980


    Matt Markinson wrote: »
    And yet most such massacres to date have in fact been carried out by legally held firearms.

    There are already hundreds of millions of handguns and tens of millions of rifles and billions of bullets in circulation. Making guns illegal or restricting guns is going to make NO difference. They would immediately be a thriving illegal gun market if hardline anti-gun laws were introduced. There already is a thriving underground gun market in regions of the US where guns are already restricted.

    Booze was banned in the 1920s and look what happened. The war on drugs has been going on for decades and drug abuse is at astronomical levels in the US.

    The horse has bolted. Guns are going to be widely available with or without gun laws.

    The arguments on guns are moot.


  • #540
    LightsStillOn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 798 ✭✭✭LightsStillOn


    stefanovich wrote: »
    Check out the silence here:
    http://www.ummah.com/forum/

    These are the moderates. Hot topics are demons, child marriage, subjecting non muslims to sharia. There seems to be a high level of mental illness in that online community which I hope to god is not representative.

    I've never heard of that site, and to be honest can't be bothered clicking through a bunch of random threads. But if it is what you say it is, then no it's not a representative. Just like Stormfront isn't a representative of white males.


  • Advertisement
  • #541
    ClovenHoof
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭ClovenHoof


    An Islamic Moderate is not the same thing as a Western Moderate.

    This failure to understand this fact is a huge problem.


Advertisement
Advertisement