Shootings in Paris - MOD NOTE UPDATED - READ OP

strelok wrote: »

well yeah, the mass shootings all take place where the federal government has made it a crime to carry weapons, precisely because there will be so many unarmed people

No.

They dont.

Some very strong comments here from both sides of the coin.
I can see both view points.
It's one farked up world and who do we have to blame for that? Politicians!

Warning! Graphic photo.

Mod Snip
Image is too graphic.

strelok wrote: »

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/

A right wing pro-gun "think-tank" report quoted by a right wing conservative pro-gun news outlet.

And anyway... 92% is not 100% so it should provide enough instances where citizens have not responded with their own weapons.

Carlee Tart Wedding wrote: »

[...]
A rock n roll gig with a mosh pit full of guns, one to each man, is so stupid an idea it's practically comical, like something out of a movie skit.

of course, but islamist mass shootings do not always happen at rock shows…

Wurzelbert wrote: »

would have to research that, it has definitely happened in israel…and i would rather have a gun on me when the **** hits the fan than not have a gun on me…

If that's the choice you choose to make (it's one I'm not entirely unsympathetic to btw) then I hope you've had some decent training on how to use it or indeed not use it should the unlikely need arise.

Custardpi wrote: »

I'm no expert but my understanding is that gun laws are still more restrictive in those countries than in many parts of the US, particularly when it comes to things like background checks. Wider societal factors in the US probably play a part too of course but there does seem to be greater loopholes Stateside, such as rules surrounding private sales at gun shows in some states.

You're probably right there, the gun show stuff in the US is nothing but dangerous. And background checks don't seem to be nearly strict enough. However to blame the US' massive gun crime statistics on that alone seems absurd. Most gang crime and plenty of shootings occur with unregistered guns, which is quite unsurprising given the size of the US border and how much stuff (drugs, people etc) get smuggled in there.

My opinion is that the real problem is a problem of attitude. There's something about American society which is so full of hate and discrimination and inequality not only between race/ethnic groups/religion but societal classes. We're so used to seeing the '1% own 99% of the wealth in america' statistics, well is it any surprise when a population who have been shafted so hard by their government, by corporations, and basically by everyone above them in the 'trickle down economics' view of the world, have a tendency to lash out irrationally?(and often fatally).


And in response to the claim that no mass shootings are stopped by people with guns, i'm no expert, but I imagine that plenty have been stopped. You just don't hear about them because they never devolve into a mass-shooting since the shooter has been shot by a civilian or police officer or whoever. The fact that so many very fatal shootings occur in the gun-free zones does lend credence to this idea too.


</offtopic>
Anyways Donald trump's claim about 'gunz n france' could well be right, obviously going up against 6/8 fanatics with automatic rifles (kalashnikovs i think?) it's inevitable that some people would sadly be killed. French people owning guns would be nothing but damage control in a situation like that. What France and Europe need is a solution to the threat of terrorism, not an exercise in damage control.

Wurzelbert wrote: »

would have to research that, it has definitely happened in israel…and i would rather have a gun on me when the **** hits the fan than not have a gun on me…

Well I agree I would too.

Israel has heavily armed guards at every restaurant. Street corner. bus stop. Shop.

Every citizen does two+ years in the military as well so they're all well trained.

La Fenetre wrote: »

Yep if only Northern Ireland had more liberal gun laws during the troubles, think of all the people that could have been saved by gun loving hero's . . :rolleyes:

Congratulations on missing my point entirely. I said that America's problem doesn't stem from the availability of guns, but rather the problems in their society. Do you think that society in Northern Ireland during the troubles wasn't f*cked up too? Or did you just ignore that thought because it didn't support your argument . . :rolleyes:

Custardpi wrote: »

If that's the choice you choose to make (it's one I'm not entirely unsympathetic to btw) then I hope you've had some decent training on how to use it or indeed not use it should the unlikely need arise.

yes of course, guns in untrained hands make no sense…i have indeed had some training, albeit that was a while ago…as a gun owner one needs to keep it up…

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

I'm sorry, but just on your first point, you bring up your experiences living in Ireland, yet only a post ago you were berating me for doing the same think and labelled it 'parochialism'?

In any case the fundamental point that I would return to now is the problem of equivalence - you seem to be retreating from the issue that we have a threat of Islamist extremism by saying 'yes but Christianity did bad things in the past too' - but I don't think anyone here least of all myself is disputing that, we're saying it has little to do with the here and now. I'm not particularly sure that the proper response to the Paris attacks is to condemn the sale of indulgences by the Catholic Church in the 16th Century, we are forced to deal with the matters that affect us today.

Incidentally, just on the 'kill the gays' bill in Uganda, it might surprise you to know that that law was ruled as invalid, even if it had not been, I've yet to see evangelical African Christian groups bombing Europe for decaying moral standards - again this is a retreat from the pressing issue.

I would submit that by all means fundamentalist ideologies are the problem, but the frantic insistence on approaching Islamist extremism as just 'one of many' problems seems to underline the fear and unwillingness people have to tackle problems specific to Islamist extremism, for fear of being daubed as racists, far-right, neo-nazi etc, as has happened here. It really smacks of a kind of politics that more about appearing to say the right things rather than tackling the substantive issues.

You are misreading my point - or perhaps I am not making it very well.

There is hysteria - hysteria that is being fed by all kinds of groups to suit their own agendas and part of that hysterical narrative is 'ALL Muslims are bad' - now, I get concerned when I see any group of people being thus described because I know what has happened in the past when the language of hate based on religion or ethnicity becomes the norm.

This is not the first (and sadly won't be the last) time we have seen such hysteria about the 'threat' posed by those who are 'other' -and it has always ended in countless innocent people losing their lives just because they were members of that broad group defined as 'other'.

ISIS speak the language of hate - are we not better than them?
Not if we do the exactly same we aren't. If we drop bombs on innocent civilians, if we allow children to drown to further our own political agendas then we too are guilty of crimes against humanity. We don't use sword - we use drones - the intention is the same - to show we can and will execute without mercy and if the innocent die along the way so be it. It's for the greater good (as defined by our desires).

If we use the same language and adopt the same intolerant mindset they win because liberal democratic Europe will be no more and that is what they want. Does it matter what insignia is on the black shirt when the results are the same

The way to tackle extremism is to not allow it to take hold. Refuse it space in our minds. Do not allow it to dictate our way of life. Remove the oxygen that feeds it.

I am reading and hearing a lot of very hateful comments from Irish people living in Ireland about the 'evil' Muslims and many of these people would be hard pressed to tell you when they had ever had a single interaction with a Muslim in their lives. No Muslim has harmed them. No Muslim has threatened them - and yet such hatred. But not such hatred towards the RCC which - in an Irish context - has caused so much suffering and hurt to innocent people who had failed to conform to it's ideology. There is a double standard and cognitive dissonance at play here that I find troubling.

Also - this rush to blame the 'liberals' and 'lefties' who 'caused' this (apparently). What the hell is that about? Did our insistence on civil liberties, laws to protect rights and welfare, democratic principles, equality, freedom of expression, freedom of belief - you know, all those things that make this thing called Europe- create these madmen?
How did it do that? Is it because those very liberal ideals are the very things they hate?
Possibly.

So now we hear that the way to protect 'our' Europe is to abandon those very ideals and judge all Muslims as guilty because they are Muslim.


What utter nonsense. People with no interest in protecting those very ideals ISIS hate so much are now using this to as an excuse to try and destroy them from within, because they hate them just as much.

smash wrote: »

The daily mail went a step further and published this.

Good. People need to see what happened with their own eyes.