Terrorist Attack in Orlando

[Greenday]

Yet another terrorist attack in America and people are out in droves blaming guns. By calling it a mass-shooting and not a terrorist attack, it takes away from the bigger issue at hand. This happens in America and gun laws are to blame. This happens in France or Belgium, wait...still happened there despite super strict gun laws. Except there IS a common denominator: terrorism. It's not going to go away just because we ignore it. They won't leave us alone if we leave them alone.

Yes this is horrible. Yes we need to advocate for more responsible gun ownership. But taking guns away from law abiding citizens isn't going to stop terrorists. This is a terrorist issue, not a gun control issue.

[NecCat]

Where is your news source? The last information I heard was about twenty minutes ago, and specifically said the gunman was an American citizen, with an assault rifle. After he started taking hostages he was shot and it's not known what his demands would be. It was completely unknown what the motive was and it was not known if this was related to terrorism. Where have they confirmed it? I'd like to read or watch that.

[AmbrosiaWriter]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-0...een-us-citizen

He was a US citizen. He had a gun license AND a security officer license. The only information we have on motive is that he saw a gay couple kissing a few days back and raged about it.

[Greenday]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/12/us/orl...club-shooting/

Heck, even CNN has jumped on it and they are the last to admit to it being Muslim terrorists instead of just a mass shooting.

He'd been investigated twice by the FBI for being affiliated with other terrorists. He had attended a lecture by a famous Imam who suggested they target gay people. He called 911 prior to entering the club and announced his affiliation with ISIS.

It's well known and reported by now that this was terrorism.

[Aragarthiel]

Considering the target, I believe it was more a hate crime than a terrorist attack. The gunman may have been a terrorist, but that doesn't immediately make it terrorism.

[Greenday]

I think it was an act of terrorism that he decided to kill two birds with one stone (horrible analogy given the situation but still).

[AmbrosiaWriter]

I found this article just now and thought it was pertinent:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...guns.html?_r=0

Now, while we can mince words and bat back and forth whether or not this particular instance was an "act of terrorism" or more simply a bigot taking out his rage on an innocent populous...

A lot of the shootings described in the article you CANNOT argue that they were "acts of terrorism." One of them even had one of the shooters being denied an assault rifle, but then still allowed to purchase a shotgun! What strange logic prevails when it is guns that are being discussed.

[Canarr]

I guess it depends on how you want to define "act of terrorism". If your definition is along the line of, any act that will bring fear into the general populace, then yes, Orlando was an act of terrorism.

However, if you want to use as definition the question of, was the attack part of a larger network of terrorists, coordinating their strikes for maximum shock value, following a central ideology? Then no: Orlando wasn't an act of terror. At least, not of the kind of Terror a War is being waged on. For fifteen years now.

He wasn't an immigrant or refugee.
He didn't come into the US carrying some sort of poisonous ideology with him.
He didn't obain his guns through a terrorist supply network or whatever.
He wasn't trained by IS, or the Taliban, in some desert training center.

He was born in the US and grew up there.
He bought his guns legally in a store.

There's no terrorist background here, nobody radicalized him against America, or Democracy, or Christianity. He was just an asshole who, for some reason, hated gay people, and listened to other assholes who spewed similar bigotry. Sure, IS claims he was one of theirs, but they'd claim Hillary as a sleeper agent if they thought it'd get them anywhere.

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

The questions of guns and terrorism is NOT a question about guns and responsible gun ownership. Vox had a leading with the conclusion article, but the article does kind of de-BS the issue.

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/3/9444417...states-america

Here's the issue... the more guns, the more deaths by gun per 100,000. How those occur is immaterial. It's the same thing as "people not wearing seatbelts vs. people dying in car accidents" It's just a number and what we do with that is up to us.

Re: blame, the American public can go ahead and start getting comfy with the idea that their inertia is the problem. This stuff happens and (I was watching this on CNN's coverage) you can basically see people spinning things immediately. "My ex was unstable", "an unstable person can't hold a job for 9 years, he's a sane terrorist", "He attended services 3 times a week", "He wasn't a Muslim."

Frankly I'm tired of it. Yea, guns are the problem here because it's too damn easy to get an assault weapon. Yea, radical Islam is the problem here as it allows the desperate to die martyrs. Yea, mental illness is the issue here as a normal human being doesn't necessitate the family of their wife to raid their home to rescue them. But we'll do nothing, because in an era of partisanship, nothing is what we do remarkably well.

[mjr]

I'm hearing now that the guy was gay, himself. Seriously, I think there's an article about it somewhere.

[NorthernZel]

I'm hearing now that the guy was gay, himself. Seriously, I think there's an article about it somewhere.

I've heard the same rumour, though I don't have any article links to back it up.

Basically, what I've heard is A) he was a frequent guest of the Pulse night club so that's why he could get in easily, and B) all the previous "got enraged when seeing two men kissing" boils down to the fact that one of the kissing men was the shooter's "crush" which made him snap, but he had to keep himself in the closet, hence the "devout family father / Daesh sympatist" attitude.

I guess we'll learn more over the next weeks/months to come.

[TheHuckster]

Apparently the shooter's wife knew about the plot, to the point she drove him to the nightclub and was with him when he bought ammunition. She also tried to talk him out of it.

Now she's under investigation by the FBI and may have charges brought against her if her actions crossed the line into being an accomplice.

[Greenday]

Apparently the shooter's wife knew about the plot, to the point she drove him to the nightclub and was with him when he bought ammunition. She also tried to talk him out of it.

Now she's under investigation by the FBI and may have charges brought against her if her actions crossed the line into being an accomplice.

Absolutely charge her. If she knew what he intended and still drove him, she's equally responsible.

[AmbrosiaWriter]

Absolutely charge her. If she knew what he intended and still drove him, she's equally responsible.

That depends. There are reports that he verbally and physically abused her. If he's an abusive husband, AND had an AR-15 assault rifle in his hand with ammo... I don't think she was in any position to say "No" to driving him.

The victim in an abusive relationship really has very little power, and even if you say "Well she could've called the police" - a lot display powerful paranoia that their abuser knows what they are doing at all times.

Not everything is so freaking black-and-white.

[Canarr]

Here is a short article on the "shooter was gay" angle.

Apparently the shooter's wife knew about the plot, to the point she drove him to the nightclub and was with him when he bought ammunition. She also tried to talk him out of it.

Now she's under investigation by the FBI and may have charges brought against her if her actions crossed the line into being an accomplice.

Interesting article; good quote here:

Veteran counterterrorism agents ruefully note that the difference between America’s latest school shooting and its latest terrorist attack is whether the gunman praised the Islamic State — regardless of whether he had any actual ties to the group.

Preventing those attacks is a fundamentally different mission, said James W. McJunkin, a former senior F.B.I. official who oversaw terrorism cases for years during Al Qaeda’s heyday. “It’s the counterterrorism equivalent of ‘How do you prevent someone from robbing a liquor store?’” he said.

Concerning the wife: if I read the article correctly, she drove him to the club on previous occasions, not on the night of the shooting. How much she knew in advance is apparently still under investigation.

In other news, it's apparently all Obama's fault

The National Rifle Association moved quickly to quash discussion of new gun policies. In a piece for USA Today, Chris W. Cox, the group’s executive director, blamed the federal authorities for not doing more to stop Mr. Mateen. “His former co-workers reported violent and racist comments,” Mr. Cox wrote. “Unfortunately, the Obama administration’s political correctness prevented anything from being done about it.”

Can that be quoted as, "The NRA would like federal authorities to arrest people for making violent and racist comments!"?