Another islamic terrorist shooting in a Gun-Free Zone

[MtnGoat]

How long did it take for President Obama to give this same order for Chattanooga shooting?

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...ooting-victims

[JJ_BPK]

How long before berry invites Chris Mintz to the HW???

[craigepo]

You have to give it to the liberals---they can absolutely ignore the issue of this shooter targeting Christians, talk about inanimate objects (guns), and the media jumps on the issue like the carrion that they are.

If you have a few minutes, take a look at the way the National Review reporter handles the debate. It's rather telling that it takes a Brit to handle the argument for Second Amendment issues.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...thing-nr-staff

[Spalding117]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

How long before berry invites Chris Mintz to the HW???

This would give me so much hope.

That article was very eye opening, and something I intend to live by and spread.
Don't give jackasses what they want, let them die like they lived, spineless nobodies.
RIP the fallen.

[echoes]

Originally Posted by JJ_BPK

How long before berry invites Chris Mintz to the HW???

JMHO Sir,

He won't, because he knows deep down in his coal-charred-Islamic-heart that Chris Mintz is a US Veteran, and completely OUT of his league!

The O can only dream of having the Courage of REAL War Vets!

Holly...Prayers Out to Chris.

[Bracholi]

Originally Posted by PRB

We, the US, granted very specific rights to the mentally challenged back in the 1980's...it is almost impossible to get someone committed without their own consent.
We went with individual liberty, strongly, to the point that many that should be institutionalized are out and about.
How do we find the fine line?

I believe we can all agree backpedaling needs, and has needed for some time, to be done. To solve a compromise between individual liberty and need to protect society I believe a solution is two-fold. Re-empower parents (the carrot) but make them fully culpable for their child (the stick). Even if a child has grown into "adulthood" and moved out, if the parent ignored the signs, and such evidence is available to that fact, they're still responsible (I've never met a parent of any adult whom didn't feel responsible in some part to the actions of their child regardless of the age of either). If people have forgotten how to feel the powerful senses of pride, disappointment, fear, etc. towards their children we will just have to remind them. Nothing will remind Mrs. Welfare Baby Isapaycheck of her personal responsibility and the powerful emotions present in parenting like a 20 year sentence when her "sweet innocent baby boy" is shot dead after trying to kill a police officer and it is determined that she knew her boy was troubled and did nothing.

Going back to the carrot though, if you know your child is troubled, mentally deficient, and potentially dangerous, you should be able to document this in childhood. If the government is incapable, unwilling, or simply unable to prevent your child from a murderous rampage, but you've done everything you can, you really have already suffered more than you deserved. One tool that should be at your disposal though, is to adjudicate your child as mentally deficient just before adulthood.

A child remains a child only so long. When they reach adulthood, they've now arbitrarily been deemed completely mentally competent by a system which has changed the very definition of socially acceptable behaviors, normalization, criminality, etc. [Obviously we have a language barrier in this country, some of us speak the same language our founding fathers used to forge the very framework of our nation upon; whilst the other side have found that words only mean what they say they mean at which time that definition is deemed convenient... but I digress]

We need to re-establish a criteria by which a person whom has been identified either through [later in life] repeated incidence of criminal activity [which will likely never stop a school shooting done by a young adult], or by identifications of a psychological pathology by involved parents and school administrations. A metric can then be determined. A sliding scale might work best, in which a sliding scale of pathological tendencies are rated from Generally Recognized as Malignant to Potential Risk to Self or Society. If the child is dangerous, they can be made a ward of the parent(s) through judicial ruling, or if necessary due to a lack of family capability, availability, etc., a ward of the state.

I can't imagine how with all the tragedies which have occurred which, excepting the obvious but misreported Islamic terrorist attacks, have been carried out by mentally ill people. The sad reality is that if we're unwilling to allow everyone to defend themselves, and actually something fundamentally more destructive to our nation, people are unwilling to "sink so low" as to carry a firearm in their own defense, then at the very least we should be arming our parents, schools, and law enforcement with the ability to shift these mentally ill folks into a system actually designed to ensure the highest quality of life, while virtually eliminating the risks those same people pose to the rest of society,.. Well we're just going to have to become desensitized as people have been saying. "Sorry for you loss, but at least it wasn't me or mine this time around."

Anyways, that's my .47 cents.
My apologies if I beat the horse to a pulp. I just am ready for some real hope to be restored, and maybe some real change, from the bottom up. If we can't convince Washington to change their ways, we can ignore Washington and operate independently first, locally second, etc etc.

[Team Sergeant]

Takes a long time for the Sheeple to realize that GUN FREE = DEATH ZONE. Going to take many more sheeple dying before the appropriate changes are made.

Liberals know they cannot be in power with armed citizens and the only road to tyranny/oppression is a disarmed people.

GUN FREE = DEATH ZONE

[GratefulCitizen]

Not convinced the nation, as a whole, is any more dangerous than it was in decades past.
Information technology just makes it feel that way.

A caveat: particular places may be worse than they had been, but there have always been areas to avoid, e.g. "bad neighborhoods".

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinio...lumn/73199052/


It's all about the spin.
The media wants people to feel helpless.

Fact is, a man fought, and lived.
Others surrendered, and were executed.

Several years ago, there was a particular case where muslim terrorists were executing captives and distributing the videos they made.
One man refused to kneel for his execution, proudly fighting a battle he knew he couldn't win, and saying "I'll show you how an Italian dies!"

The terrorists didn't want that video circulating.
It undermined the propaganda war.

The propaganda war for those who would dominate and oppress (foreign or domestic) is about perpetuating fear and helplessness.
Surrender your Liberty to the supposed strongman and he will save you.

Save you from what?
Death?

EVERYBODY DIES EVENTUALLY.
The question is: How will you live?

Originally Posted by echoes

JMHO Sir,

He won't, because he knows deep down in his coal-charred-Islamic-heart that Chris Mintz is a US Veteran, and completely OUT of his league!

The O can only dream of having the Courage of REAL War Vets!

Holly...Prayers Out to Chris.

So, then why did he invite the 3 Americans (2 Vets) who acted heroically on the train in France to the WH?

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen

Not convinced the nation, as a whole, is any more dangerous than it was in decades past.
Information technology just makes it feel that way.

A caveat: particular places may be worse than they had been, but there have always been areas to avoid, e.g. "bad neighborhoods".

Amen!

[MtnGoat]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozJTenNzUKM

Don't want a gun in your house, here you go!!

[JJ_BPK]

Tin Foil Crowd??

Or Comrade Vladimir's PR guys blowing smoke??

Home » Breaking News, Crimes, North America, Terrorism »

Oregon Mass Shooter On Terror List Obama Refused To Take From Russia

Posted by EU Times on Oct 2nd, 2015 // 742 Comments 5K

The Federal Security Services (FSB) is reporting today that an American black-Islamist terror suspect, who yesterday committed an act of mass murder in the State of Oregon (United States), had been included on a list of 87,000 “known/suspected” Islamic terrorists that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) refused last month to accept from the Federation due to its not being “politically viable in the present atmosphere”.

According to this report, the black-Islamist terrorist who committed this act of terror, Chris Harper Mercer, had previously been indentified by electronic intelligence specialists within the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) as being an Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) adherent after he had attempted to gain passage to Syria via Turkey during the first week of September, 2015.

By the Obama regime refusing to accept this terror list from the Federation, this report continues, Mercer was able to accomplish his terror act when yesterday he killed 9 people and wounded 7 others at the Umpqua Community College prior to his being shot and killed by local US police forces.

http://www.eutimes.net/2015/10/orego...e-from-russia/

[BrokenSwitch]

They said the same thing about Tsarnaev.

[craigepo]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

Takes a long time for the Sheeple to realize that GUN FREE = DEATH ZONE. Going to take many more sheeple dying before the appropriate changes are made.

Liberals know they cannot be in power with armed citizens and the only road to tyranny/oppression is a disarmed people.

GUN FREE = DEATH ZONE

You really are onto something here. I would like to see a study of the number of homicides committed in gun-free zones/cities per annum.

This could be made into a really good argument. Possibly, to the mind of a potential "crowd shooter", an honest person with a gun is a scary proposition. Also, maybe people who carry concealed weapons are loaning more security to others than we think. Thoughts?

[The Reaper]

It all goes back to the observation that the only thing that can quickly stop a bad man with a gun is a good man with a gun.

Disarming the law abiding populace is completely ineffective on those intent on murder.

TR