The neighbor says, as she understood it, the suspect had lived in the apartment with his girlfriend until their recent break-up. The suspect had then moved into another apartment nearby two weeks ago. She says he had returned to the old apartment and was banging on the door of his old apartment, demanding to be let in. The neighbor also said she believed the suspect had a 9-11 tattoo.Of course, Sikhs had nothing to do with 9/11, though people sometimes mistake Sikhs for Muslims (and mistake Muslims generally for the subgroup of Muslims behind 9/11), but in a planned killing where someone goes to the place of worship, it would be harder to make the mistake.
ADDED: The FBI special agent in charge of the investigation said: "We are looking at ties to white supremacist groups."
Posts
190 comments:
Don't be silly. Everybody knows that in this Administration, white people commit "domestic terrorism."
But Major Hassan can pretty much hang out a neon sign screaming "Look at me! Allah Akbar! Kill the infidel!" and this Administration files it under "Workplace Violence."
It matters whether we consider motivation the primary way of defining domestic terrorism or result. I think results-oriented would be a better measure (in which case both this and the Aurora shooting could qualify, along with the Fort Hood), as opposed to what seems the more arbitrary system currently used by the media/government.
By all means, let's initiate another media orgy of pseudo-psychological examination, grief porn and futile debates about motives and political blame! Maybe it will urge another nutcase to shoot up another public place, and keep the public entertained!
Don't be silly. Everybody knows that in this Administration, white people commit "domestic terrorism."
Why would you care [or not] if the FBI said this was domestic terrorism?
Why would you care [or not] if the FBI said this was domestic terrorism?
No.
Because the FBI, you, or any government agency, has no sane definition of "domestic terrorism"
And while this event is tragic and awful, but I agree the "search for answers" emoting by the media is silly and pointless.
Wait a second. It's not like the Army just discharged this guy yesterday.
He hasn't worn the uniform in 14 friggin' years, he was only in for one enlistment and got an UOC discharge at that.
What the Hell does the Army have to do with this?
And there it is, in the headline, GUNMAN IDENTIFIED AS FORMER ARMY SOLDIER.
Fuck. Them.
The fact that he was in the Army in the 90s is probably about as relevant as how bald he was.
"Why would you care [or not] if the FBI said this was domestic terrorism?"
Same reason I always question hate crime and domestic terrorism charges: equal protection under the law.
But in this case, does it matter what it's investigated as when the shooter's dead?
It's not pointless, Jay! It's ratings! It's eyeballs! It's money!
And it's a wonderful political diversion for interested politicians!
Dead bodies make excellent podia from which to give impassioned speeches, or for setting up chairs for a chat show.
garage: Why would you care [or not] if the FBI said this was domestic terrorism?
Garage? That strange "whooshing" sound you just heard? That was the point sailing right over your head.
No, no... Don't try to look up. You'll drown yourself gawking at the rain.
Palladian said...
It's not pointless, Jay! It's ratings! It's eyeballs! It's money!
Well, yeah.
And it makes you wonder why they can't realize it is actually them waving the bloody shirts.
What Palliadian said--these tragic events keep the news networks and pundits in material, which lead to eyeballs, which lead to advertising revenue. Thats the sick business at hand.
I meant to ask why your Palladian is on fire. It reminded me of the Japanese flag that changes when they are at war, when you think about it is the most amazing logo ever. Graphically, I think their flag is the best. A dot. Then a radiating dot. Your Palladian is like that. Are you at war?
"but in a planned killing where someone goes to the place of worship, it would be harder to make the mistake."
Since full speculation mode has now engaged (it was refeshing to not have to listen to it for almost a day), I think you're probably correct. I'm guessing he knew perfectly well they were Sikhs. He may have made the mistake of thinking they were some sort of Muslim sect, but I doubt it. I think it was just a combination of insanity and plain old xenophobia (which may be redundant).
Or maybe he was a great admirer of Indira Gandhi (***sarcasm***).
No one could have done this alone. Clearly, Harry Reid was a second gunman. I haven't seen Reid even deny it.
Senator Reid, take a few minutes off from buggering boys, come clean and disprove these allegations so we can all move on!!
Unfortunately for us Palladian has hit the nail on the head. Death porn sells papers. Like some posted earlier, he hasn't been in the Army for years but what's the headline? It's all to do one thing. Push that meme. Bring home the gold.
Who wants to bet Zero comes out with gun bans after this? You can probably get odds at a casino in Vegas now.
Ps.
If this guy is a lib, watch the story be dropped.
I was going to say it before I saw that others did: Free@Last is an obvious Moby.
Should I delete Free@Last and everyone responding to him?
It's really bad when one Moby screws up an entire thread like this. It's disrespectful to the victims to have a distraction like that on this thread, but so many great commenters have responded to him already.
I'm inclined to delete every reference to this person and let this thread restart.
I meant to ask why your Palladian is on fire. It reminded me of the Japanese flag that changes when they are at war, when you think about it is the most amazing logo ever. Graphically, I think their flag is the best. A dot. Then a radiating dot. Your Palladian is like that. Are you at war?
Thanks for noticing, Chip. My Palladian villa is a reflection of the tenor of our Age, as I perceive it, depending on my general humour, the humours of the observers here, what I had for breakfast, &c. Sometimes it's a ruin, sometimes ablaze, sometimes in twilight, sometimes a suburban fantasy. I've a new one for later today.
Who wants to bet Zero comes out with gun bans after this?
It's certainly getting harder to be a fervent supporter of gun rights when there is a bloodbath every week.
PREDICTION:
This multiple homicide will be treated differently from the Aurora, Colorado multiple homicide by the mainstream media (Time magazine is a good example), as lond as it appears that no so-called "assault weapon" or large-capacity magazines were used.
It is essentially the opposite of an occasion for the anti-gun forces to claim, "We told you so." Because if (as preliminarily appears) the shooter had only a semi-auto pistol and a several 10-round magazines, it proves the point of what pro-gun advocates said about Aurora; that so-called "assault weapons bans" would not prevent another event with a determined assailant.
I was going to say it before I saw that others did: Free@Last is an obvious Moby.
Should I delete Free@Last and everyone responding to him?
Leave it. A good object lesson.
Don't delete!
Usually Palladian is the one who is alerting folks re the real motives of other commenters.
It's interesting to see the tables turned.
Drudge highlights that he was a "psychological operations specialist." I'd guess that, as an E4, he was trained to do things such as operate a loudspeaker. Probably not relevant.
It's certainly getting harder to be a fervent supporter of gun rights when there is a bloodbath every week
Given the number of murders in Chicago (4 dead, 25 wounded in weekend violence), I'm not sure that sentence means what you think it means.
I have to delete all responses to and talk about the Moby who was a prime example of what we call a "bad faith" commenter.
Any questions or discussion about this incident can be put in email (address above) or at the "You've come to the right place..." page.
"Should I....?"
What ever happened to the viewpoint espoused by Thomas Paine in "On Liberty" that the worse the speech is the more widely disseminated it should be so that all may see how truly awful the ideas advanced therein are?
There may be white supremacist overtones involved which implies domestic terrorism.
A great example of a comment that wouldn't get deleted here, but should (based on the standards applied to Free@Last):
LINK
It's certainly getting harder to be a fervent supporter of gun rights when there is a bloodbath every week.
Life is a bloodbath. Protecting our rights is especially important in times where those rights are most stressed by circumstances.
Cars kill a lot more people than murderers. Let's ban them! People stub their toes on coffee tables quite frequently. Let's ban them! Think of all the terrible things that have happened because of unrestrained speech. Let's ban it!
It's an obviously stupid response, but sadly the ignorant and thoughtless citizens who drive our policy are extremely susceptible to stupid responses. Television relies on stupid responses, after all.
Anybody ever notice this type of incident (mass shootings) seems to happen a lot more often in Democrat Administrations?
Just sayin'.
I don't know that domestic terrorism can be so quickly ruled out, although, unless this guy had some manifesto or an axe to grind against these people, it's going to be tough to make a case for it.
PS Tabbing a shooter in a case like this as former military goes back to the Vietnam War. It's the media fall-back position.
PPS Isn't Sikhism a blend of Islam and Hinduism? Did a quick search and couldn't find anything conclusive.
Given the number of murders in Chicago (4 dead, 25 wounded in weekend violence), I'm not sure that sentence means what you think it means.
On the contrary, your reply actually reinforces what I said.
I think the media is desperately going to try and make this guy out as an American Breivik since ABC embarassed themselves when they jumped the gun and claimed James Holmes was a member of the Tea Party.
Speaking of bloodbaths...
On the contrary, your reply actually reinforces what I said.
No it doesn't, because in Chicago, guns are almost IMPOSSIBLE to get legally. Hence, illegal shootings.
What makes you think that if guns are outlawed, that nobody will have guns? Heroin, Cocaine, and Marijuana are illegal, yet people still use these substances.
I think the media is desperately going to try and make this guy out as an American Breivik since ABC embarassed themselves when they jumped the gun and claimed James Holmes was a member of the Tea Party.
And what if he really was an American Breivik? Or are we supposed to immediately conclude, on scant evidence, that he was just some looney-toon who'd had a bad day?
Jason is correct: a white man, former military, is the only true terrorist of the feds' fevered PC imaginations.
I predict an orgy of media condemnation of this man and the tea party and blah, blah, blah. And then another nut will do it too, so he can be somebody.
They have been waiting for him for over 10 years and now they have him. MSNBC, NYT, LAT will go crazy.
No it doesn't, because in Chicago, guns are almost IMPOSSIBLE to get legally. Hence, illegal shootings.
I didn't think of that. I didn't realize that Chicagoans were unable to leave the city and purchase a gun in Cicero.
What makes you think that if guns are outlawed, that nobody will have guns?
I don't know. Maybe because you don't hear much about mass shootings in countries that have strict gun control or outright bans.
I'm not advocating a ban, I'm simply saying its becoming very difficult being a gun rights supporter when we are presented with mass shootings every week.
"domestic terrorism", "hate crime", ??
Sorry, but I just cannot get comfortable with the idea of categorizing crimes by nature of intent. Too close to the idea of the Thought Police.
Yes, there should be some means of accounting for the *degree* of intent - e.g. pre-meditated, negligent, accidental - in assessing responsibility for an event.
However it seems doubtful and dangerous to attempt qualitative judgements of motive.
Suppose the perpetrator in such a case were motivated by barbaphobia, not hatred of a particular religion. Well, we'd just have to let the perp go, since bearded persons are not a protected species under hate crime laws.
It is already asking a lot to have juries make quantitative judgement of intent. Requiring juries to make qualitative judgement of intent is unnecessary.
Cheap shot, garage.
Also incorrect.
Plenty of Lefties around here could be Mobys. It's just so hard to tell because most of the tenets of the Left are so lame to begin with.
Colonel Angus said...
On the contrary, your reply actually reinforces what I said.
Really?
Is that because it is virtually impossible to legally carry a handgun in Chicago?
Strict New Jersey gun control:
LINK
Or are we supposed to immediately conclude, on scant evidence, that he was just some looney-toon who'd had a bad day?
Until you have something better than scant evidence, that's exactly what you should conclude.
I don't know. Maybe because you don't hear much about mass shootings in countries that have strict gun control or outright bans.
There have been 2 mass shootings in Finland in the last 5 years.
Your ignorance on this topic really isn't suiting you well.
Moby ~ thar she blows!
hmm, his thread makes me smile.
ok, it's a Monday and cons still have to deal w/the reality Obama is president and mittens is a fickin' train wreck!
I didn't realize that Chicagoans were unable to leave the city and purchase a gun in Cicero.
You don't realize a whole hell of a lot.
I'm not advocating a ban, I'm simply saying its becoming very difficult being a gun rights supporter when we are presented with mass shootings every week.
Wake me up when rape, robbery, and property crime didn't see over 20% increases after Great Britain banned handguns.
Same for Australia.
Until then, carry on.
I've learned to feel comfortable saying: I don't know. It makes it a lot easier to avoid coming to embarrassing conclusions. Especially about high emotion things like violence.
I'm simply saying its becoming very difficult being a gun rights supporter when we are presented with mass shootings every week.
Don't worry about it. You're not a gun rights supporter anyway with your poor understanding of gun rights.
BTW, I bet the temple has a "No weapons" sign on the front door.
Perhaps the targeting of Sikhs by a non-Sikh is reason enough to investigate it as terrorism
I don't understand all the paranoia about an incident like this being looked at from several perspectives before making a final determination.
MJSOnline
Dozens of people were already at the temple when the gunman began his rampage, which some authorities are describing a domestic terrorist incident. But FBI representatives later backed away from that categorization, saying they were still investigating motive
Sometimes suspicious deaths are investigate as potential homicides until proven otherwise. As far as I know, no official determination has been made whether or not this was an act of domestic terrorism (whatever that is).
The shooter, whose name I will never acknowledge, was a fucking loser and deserves nothing more than to have his remains pissed on and tossed into a local landfill.
Beyond that, he deserves no attention by the press or the public. I would like to see an ethical code by the press to treat the identity of shooters with anonymity to deprive them of the twisted glory they seek. The public needs to take the attitude of "Fuck these asshole losers. I don't need to know a thing beyond the fact he's a dead, asshole loser. Where's the line start to piss on his corpse."
The attention should be given to the dead and wounded, their communities and the process of grief and healing, and not the pathetic loser.
Or are we supposed to immediately conclude, on scant evidence, that he was just some looney-toon who'd had a bad day?
Until you have something better than scant evidence, that's exactly what you should conclude.
Or, even better, conclude nothing.
There have been 2 mass shootings in Finland in the last 5 years.
Finland doesn't ban firearms.
Your ignorance on this topic really isn't suiting you well.
You were saying?
I didn't think of that. I didn't realize that Chicagoans were unable to leave the city and purchase a gun in Cicero.
I didn't think of that. I didn't realize that Americans were unable to leave the Country and purchase a gun in Mexico.
FTFY
Maybe because you don't hear much about mass shootings in countries that have strict gun control or outright bans.
Are murder and crime rates in the U.S. higher than they are in Europe BECAUSE of high gun ownership rates? And because a country has a high gun ownership rate, does that automatically follow that the crime rate will automatically shoot up? Switzerland, for example.
ok, it's a Monday and cons still have to deal w/the reality Obama is president and mittens is a fickin' train wreck!
Please explain to me how this comment was in good faith.
Well this is what you get from years of right-wing racists chanting shit about "ragheads". Own it Reich-wing tards.
Colonel Angus said...
Finland doesn't ban firearms.
And here I thought you weren't against a ban.
Anyway, you have no right to a firearm in Finland, nor do you have a right to a semi-automatic firearm.
All sales are licensend.
You have no point.
garage - did you think it was domestic terrorism when Hassan murdered all those soldiers? Or was he a po' oppressed Moo-slim?
Colonel Angus said...
You were saying?
That you're an idiot.
PS: there were 2 mass stabbings in Japan. 1 with a sword, and 1 with a knife (killing school children)
How about you stop while you're behind?
LET'S BAN EVERYTHING!
Butterfly wing flapping causes tornadoes! BAN THEM!!!
Video please of right wingers chanting rag head. I'd like to see that. Years of it, should be easy enough to find a video.
There's something wrong with you, Alex.
Col. Angus is making me despair of humanity. BAN HIM!!!!
I'm not advocating a ban, I'm simply saying its becoming very difficult being a gun rights supporter when we are presented with mass shootings every week.
You know what else you're not doing?
Typing something other than silly bumpersticker slogans.
Chip - just go to any right wing blog like Atlas Shrugged or Free Republic to find infinite postings of "raghead".
I want to ban "No Weapons" signs. Oh wait, that would be a free speech violation. Nevermind.
"was in good faith."
The truth shall set you free
Althouse mentioned recently, she doesn't have the time or inclination to be a baby sitter ie her thread "rules" are basically meaningless. Again if this was a serious blog, it would require membership.
There's something wrong with you, Alex.
He's a troll?
this is more proof:
Why point the finger at the MSM? For the HBD crowd, Sig has already jumped to the conclusion that he's just some beta male nut, and for others the crime is that we'll never heard the end of this.
Anyways, its obvious this guy wasn't a Muslim hater who got confused. Most bigots these days spend most of their time on Pamela Gellar, Robert Spencer's etc webpages, where they are programmed to understand who to properly hate and who not to (for example Sikhs). Apparently this guy had a 9/11 tattoo on his body, indicating he probably had some sort of connection/obssession with the disaster and therefore he would understand that Sikhs are not the same as Muslims.
Posted by: Kidd | August 06, 2012 at 02:15 AM
Pam Gellar is directly to blame for this.
garage, shiloh and I are blood brothers of the progressive way. We know we're right and you people are just plain wrong.
Are murder and crime rates in the U.S. higher than they are in Europe BECAUSE of high gun ownership rates?
No, I think our crime rates are higher due to other factors.
THE NEWS IS FILLED WITH NEWS OF DEATH EVERY WEEK!
ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT IT'S GETTING HARDER TO SUPPORT LIFE WITH NEWS OF DEATH EVERY WEEK.
Well this is what you get from years of right-wing racists chanting shit about "ragheads". Own it Reich-wing tards.
garage - did you think it was domestic terrorism when Hassan murdered all those soldiers? Or was he a po' oppressed Moo-slim?
How can the same person post these two comments in the same thread, only two comments apart? Is Alex a split-personality?
Why doesn't Alex get deleted? He's jacked more comments threads over the years than the late Moby of earlier in this thread.
How can the same person post these two comments in the same thread, only two comments apart? Is Alex a split-personality?
Because he or she is a troll, and he or she is mocking the fact that he's been allowed to screw up conversations with impunity without ever being deleted?
Anyway, you have no right to a firearm in Finland, nor do you have a right to a semi-automatic firearm.
All sales are licensend.
Jay, you pointed to Finland as an example of a European country that had mass shootings. Finland does not ban firearms. The fact they require licenses is irrelevant.
No, I think our crime rates are higher due to other factors.
If you believe this (as do I), please explain how banning guns makes us safer.
Why doesn't Alex get deleted? He's jacked more comments threads over the years than the late Moby of earlier in this thread.
Bingo. He's definitely not commenting in good faith.
Seriously, who hates Sikhs, other than Muslims and racists? And with racists, why would they single out Sikhs of all damn minorities? If he isn't a Muslim convert, I'm inclined to think that he's a nutbar who had a relative or girlfriend convert to Sikhism and took it really badly.
This is one of those things where yes, I do want to know what caused it. If there's some sort of new racialist group of anti-Sikhs or anti-South Asian-anythings out there, I'd like to know. But South Milwaukee seems a strange place to find a supremacist militia group, don't you think?
If you believe this (as do I), please explain how banning guns makes us safer.
Well it makes it harder to kill someone for starters.
IMO this killing attack is on the fault line that is causing tremors and perhaps a coming quake.
When the loners are reflecting on the failure of family or society to meet their needs, there arises a hatred toward weird Others who seem to have it made in a community of their own that supports one another in America.
Their cultural identity and success seems to be unearned to Native Born citizens who are on their own, Like Rolling Stones.
That division has been Obama's ticket to power. He claims to represent all of the others gaining acceptance into the Federal Welfare world called the USA.
IMO today's Depression of unemployed white workers is a planned disaster just as the end of Carbon based cheap energy supplies is a planned disaster.
Well it makes it harder to kill someone for starters.
We're getting circular here, so I'm not sure how to respond to this one.
The highest crime rates in the country per capita are OVERWHELMINGLY inner cities, where guns are all but impossible to get legally. Lower crime rates exist in rural and suburban areas, where guns are MUCH EASIER to get. So your points don't follow.
Mitch H. said...
Seriously, who hates Sikhs, other than Muslims and racists? And with racists, why would they single out Sikhs of all damn minorities? If he isn't a Muslim convert, I'm inclined to think that he's a nutbar who had a relative or girlfriend convert to Sikhism and took it really badly.
Good point. The Sikhs are generally seen in pop culture as good guys (all those old Bengal Lancer movies).
Unless they parked in this guy's driveway when they went to temple or something, it's hard to see a reason.
PS Sikhs have been visible in this country for a fairly long time, tg.
PPS Isn't Sikhism a blend of Islam and Hinduism?
I worked with a Sikh who described it as closer to Buddhism. It's not really very close to anything, but it has no history with either Islam or Hinduism. He thought it was a rejection of the excessive religious aggressiveness of both. An attempt to find a path forward while leaving the eternal conflict behind.
It didn't really work out that way.
According to the press conference,
one of those greedy public union crybabies took 9 bullets trying to save lives, still in critical condition.
"Mitch H. said...
Seriously, who hates Sikhs, other than Muslims and racists?"
The confusion comes from calling Muslims rag-heads. The one documented case of murder in retaliation for 9-11 included the attacker mistaking the Sikh for a Mulsim because of the turban.
one of those greedy public union crybabies took 9 bullets trying to save lives, still in critical condition.
Maybe he'll die, then you'll have another body to stand on when barking your political obscenities, garage.
Don't let a good tragedy go to waste, to paraphrase one of your comrades!
Colonel Angus said...
Jay, you pointed to Finland as an example of a European country that had mass shootings. Finland does not ban firearms. The fact they require licenses is irrelevant.
Actually, I pointed to Findland because they have the same type of policies regarding gun ownership you seem to advocate.
Duh.
Own it.
The highest crime rates in the country per capita are OVERWHELMINGLY inner cities, where guns are all but impossible to get legally. Lower crime rates exist in rural and suburban areas, where guns are MUCH EASIER to get. So your points don't follow.
Haven't crime rates in inner cities always been higher than rural or suburban areas just simply due to larger concentrations of people?
I'm just following logic. If put into a situation where I am being attacked I think my chances are better with the knife wielder than the guy with a gun.
He's your guy.
Colonel Angus said...
Well it makes it harder to kill someone for starters.
That's right!!!
Theere was no nerve-gas attack on the Tokyo subway killing 13 people.
Keep you blinders on, and move along.
Colonel Angus said...
Haven't crime rates in inner cities always been higher than rural or suburban areas just simply due to larger concentrations of people?
No.
But don't slow down.
You're in the hole, so keep digging!
It will help.
I swear.
"one of those greedy public union crybabies took 9 bullets trying to save lives, still in critical condition."
garage, you are absolutely pathetic and a complete jack-ass.
Actually, I pointed to Findland because they have the same type of policies regarding gun ownership you seem to advocate.
Jay
Finland does not ban guns. Let me say that again. Finland does not ban guns. You can legally purchase hand guns or long rifles in Finland.
Their gun policies are about the same as ours.
By the way, I love watching the stupidity unfold.
First:
Colonel Angus said...
I'm not advocating a ban
Secondly:
Colonel Angus said...
think our crime rates are higher due to other factors.
Finally:
Well it [banning guns] makes it harder to kill someone for starters.
Gee, what could this person really believe?
Why would you care [or not] if the FBI said this was domestic terrorism?
Because, absent current facts indicating it is, it diverts and wastes resources the same way an prank 911-call does. That and all the cable-news chin-pullers speculating same.
It's not really very close to anything, but it has no history with either Islam or Hinduism.
It's relatively recent as a religion, founded by some prince or ruler in the Punjab in the fifteenth century as a sort of deliberate synthesis of Islam and local flavors of Hinduism, IIRC. Maybe some Buddhism, sometimes it's hard to tell the more esoteric elements of those two traditions from each other, especially when you're operating in a Gnostic mode.
But it looks like the shooter was some sort of racist skinhead, apparently was in a white-power musical group for a while in the Oughts. I think that's strange enough that they'll drop the ex-soldier angle for this "musician goes on rampage" angle instead, once the media realizes what they have in front of them.
I'm willing to bet at this point that it's just a "I hate foreign brown people" thing, unless the cops find a big stash of specifically anti-Sikh crazy in this guy's place.
Haven't crime rates in inner cities always been higher than rural or suburban areas just simply due to larger concentrations of people?
Crime rates are expressed in acts / population, so the pupulation base itself isn't an issue.
Colonel Angus said...
Jay
Finland does not ban guns. Let me say that again. Finland does not ban guns
Idiot:
I didn't say they banned guns.
Their gun policies are about the same as ours.
Hysterical.
Um, you do realize you have a legal right to a firearm in America and you do not in Findland, right?
You do realize every gun purchase in Findland requires that said gun be kept in a NATIONAL registry, right?
Other than that, totaly the same.
Idiot.
Their gun policies are about the same as ours.
Please point me to the American national handgun registry.
Please point me to the Finnish 2nd Amendment. (Firearms can only be obtained with an acquisition license, which can be applied for at the local police for a fee)
Please point me to a Finnish concealed carry law. (To obtain a firearms license, an individual must declare a valid reason to own a gun (self defense is not considered "valid").
This is fun...
That's right!!!
Theere was no nerve-gas attack on the Tokyo subway killing 13 people.
I'll go out on a limb and guess its harder to acquire nerve gas than a handgun.
"Crime rates are expressed in acts / population, so the pupulation base itself isn't an issue."
-- Yes, and no. As you get more and more people in a location, you get more and more people who can commit crimes. Since crime to criminal is not a one-to-one correlation (one person can commit multiple crimes), having just a few criminals in a population can increase the crime rate.
So, if inner cities have the same, rough, amount of criminals as sparsely populated urban areas, but those criminals have more opportunities for crime, the rate will go up.
And that is only controlling for population, not other factors that might promote criminal action (like economic situation.)
Seriously, who hates Sikhs, other than Muslims and racists?
Well, Indira Gandi's family, for starters. Other Sikhs, for temple governance, spiritual, or political differences. And, reaching for my inner Joe Biden, any garden-variety nut job with a beef looking for payback against a convenience store owner or a cabbie.
No, I think our crime rates are higher due to other factors.
Our *homicide* rate is higher but our other crime rates are in many cases lower, sometimes much lower.
Colonel Angus said...
I'll go out on a limb and guess its harder to acquire nerve gas than a handgun.
Guns are banned in Japan.
You know what is easier to obtain than a handgun?
Fertilizer.
You know what you can do with fertilizer?
Blow up the federal building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
Don't let a good tragedy go to waste, to paraphrase one of your comrades!
Oh fuck off. We've been hearing about "greedy" public union "thugs" in these comments ad nauseum for years. I didn't hear any reports of Americans for Prosperity rushing to the scene to take bullets to the face.
Our *homicide* rate is higher
And perhaps the question we should be asking is why? I don't believe being a gun owner turns someone into a homicidal maniac. That said, we certainly have a high number of people who are willing to kill another person and the easy ability to obtain a firearm just makes their task all the more easier.
I'm a gun owner myself so as I mentioned earlier, its getting harder to support gun rights when some guy legally buys a gun and shoots up a theater or house of worship.
Garage has a good point for the first time in a while.
The Police guy did his job with courage and self sacrifice. This ain't Norway.
The Neo Nazi white power ideology is a 90 year old and well known threat. It is the ultimate cult based upon a spiritual belief system from a false prophet that justifies murders...of everybody they chose to kill. Their greatest hatred is to liberal compromisers who will not join them in defending the white race.
They are idiots, but can be very dangerous idiots with no mercy.
Conservatives need to publicly renounce these guys in no mealy mouthed apologetics and join liberals in the fight to stop them.
"I'll go out on a limb and guess its harder to acquire nerve gas than a handgun."
Sure (depends on your resources, as it can be made by a knowledgable person), but it's easier to generate any of a number of deadly substances than to acquire a handgun. In some cases, a great deal easier.
Firearms are a pretty inefficient way to kill large numbers of people, but still highly effective when it's the only firearm in the vicinity. Funny thing about these massacres, they end when other firearms arrive.
Moby: Any commenter that makes the right look bad.
one of those greedy public union crybabies took 9 bullets trying to save lives, still in critical condition.
Bitter, stupid and off-topic is no way to go through life, son.
"Conservatives need to publicly renounce these guys in no mealy mouthed apologetics and join liberals in the fight to stop them."
How can you even make such a statement? Why should conservatives even be considered in the same breath with these lunatics?
This is not akin to everyday Muslims denouncing the radical elements of their religion.
I don't know if it's a hate crime, but it's certainly a hateful crime. Children at play and people at prayer should be sacrosanct from harm. But I suppose for just that reason the truly evil find such a crime appealing.
Guns are banned in Japan.
Japan also has a homicide rate of .35 per 100,000.
You know what is easier to obtain than a handgun? Fertilizer. You know what you can do with fertilizer?
I'll take another wild guess that the knowledge and expertise in making a manure bomb isn't all that widespread.
You know you can kill someone with a sharpended pencil too but it's more difficult.
And perhaps the question we should be asking is why? I don't believe being a gun owner turns someone into a homicidal maniac. That said, we certainly have a high number of people who are willing to kill another person and the easy ability to obtain a firearm just makes their task all the more easier.
Maybe. We've already crossed that bridge, though. There's nothing you could do now that would make weapons significantly more difficult to obtain that law-abiding people would tolerate.
Of course, it would probably be more effective, not to mention less offensive towards the law-abiding, to do the politically un-correct thing and target the people we know are responsible for most of the homicide. But because that would be far too distasteful, we are cautioned to avert our eyes and punish everyone. Equally. Because it's "fair."
I'll take another wild guess that the knowledge and expertise in making a manure bomb isn't all that widespread.
It's not manure, it's ammonium nitrate. And it's not exactly a military secret what goes into one. It's right in the name: ANFO. Ammonium Nitrate Fuel Oil.
I watched a Sikh porno once because I thought it would be hot and kind of forbidden and as a result more hot.
Well on closer inspection of the "actors" I realized they were Brazilians pretending to be Sikhs.
Total disappointment. There are a million Brazilians in pornos and I wanted Sikh Sex.
I can identify a country of origin on someone within one minute.
I want to ban "No Weapons" signs. Oh wait, that would be a free speech violation.
Only if you're the Government. You are free to ban them on your own property.
...and join liberals in the fight to stop them.
This is too funny. Remind me: What are liberals doing "in the fight" to stop neo-Nazis again?
Is it a lot of cluck-clucking about Scott Walker on MSNBC or something like that?
jrberg3...The traditional conservatives can easily be lulled to sleep into thinking that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. But history teaches us that the Nazi mentality is everyone's enemy and cannot be our ally or useful pawn.
These mentally ill people who imitate Conservatives will attack the weak; and we will appear weak to them if we go along and keep quiet as if it's not our responsability to speak out when they use violence against innocent groups such as Sikhs, Jews, liberals, blacks, but leave us alone for the present.
It's not manure, it's ammonium nitrate. And it's not exactly a military secret what goes into one. It's right in the name: ANFO. Ammonium Nitrate Fuel Oil.
Forgive me weak attempt at levity. I'm aware creating such a killing tool is not a impossible task but I don't think its the preferred method by mass murderers.
Pistol?
Give me some Tide, a couple of 5 gallon cans of gasoline and a couple of fireworks and I'll show you mayhem.
access to a HS chem lab and some metallic sodium? ammonia? a bit of Carbon? some moderately strong acid?
HCl + NaCN -> HCN + NaCl
phoof hydrogen Cyanide
want to talk about the metalic chlorates or perchlorates?
Ammonia fertilizers?
Most Insecticides?
I'm not a rocket scientist, just a failed ChemE who got sent to Vietnam :)
Pistols are so 18th century.
I mean the Brazilians did have on turbans and long beards in the video and were at a "temple" but they had a bullshit hindi accent.
tits
garage mahal said...
According to the press conference,
one of those greedy public union crybabies took 9 bullets trying to save lives, still in critical condition.
You don't learn, do you.
Policing us is one of those jobs that the state is obligated to provide.
What you probably don't know, because you don't bother to find facts, is that the police are not obligated to risk their lives to save anyone. The fact that this officer did makes him a real hero.
Your petty, childish, statement just serves to trivialize the enormous sacrifice this officer made. God bless him.
Lastly the "sikhs" in the porno were completely shaved from chest to crack to sack.
If they wanted to be authentic sikhs they would of at least had some hair, specifically around their hog.
I'm aware creating such a killing tool is not a impossible task but I don't think its the preferred method by mass murderers.
No, true mass murderers use less messy chemicals like Zyklon B. Unhinged maniacs tend to prefer small arms because they're too stupid and impatient to do anything else.
But even then, your premise deserves to be challenged: is there any validity in focusing our efforts on preventing relatively rare instances of spree killings, vs. the more mundane but constant level of criminal homicide? The latter accounts for far more actual death and injuries.
I'll go out on a limb and guess its harder to acquire nerve gas than a handgun.
Hell, Colonel, I'll go two points further - it's probably illegal, too. And harder to get than a gun. Yet it didn't stop the killer from using it.
So once again - tell me how making guns illegal (like nerve gas) will decrease people from getting guns illegally.
But even then, your premise deserves to be challenged: is there any validity in focusing our efforts on preventing relatively rare instances of spree killings, vs. the more mundane but constant level of criminal homicide? The latter accounts for far more actual death and injuries.
I would go back to my original question as to why we have such a high homicide rate to begin with?
I only pointed to the mass shootings because we've had two in as many weeks. How do we prevent that? I have no idea.
Anybody ever notice this type of incident (mass shootings) seems to happen a lot more often in Democrat Administrations?
Didn't think about it until you brought it up, but looking at a list of the largest mass shootings in America it is a close race...six under a Dem and five under a Repub.
I'll take another wild guess that the knowledge and expertise in making a manure bomb isn't all that widespread.
Um, you can learn all about it on the Internet.
Or do you want to pretend the use of the Internet isn't widespread?
I wish these political issues of gun control and "Islamophobia" were not being exploited because of these tragedies.
We must do something as a society to persuade young men who are going wacko to seek medical/mental health services instead of taking their pain out on others. They always seem to go after good people -- the Amish children, patriotic soldiers, a Congresswoman, innocent movie goers.
As a side note on the gun control issue, countries with gun control have much higher suicide rates than the US. Is that the solution we're really looking for? see WHO Suicide rates per 100,000 by country, year and sex (Table)
I'm looking to see where I ever stated that restricting gun ownership would eliminate homicides.
Yes, even if guns were banned there would still be people who would get them yet it would be much harder and more expensive then running to the local Wal-mart.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that we are no different than the French, Germans or Belgians and they are just as murderous as we are but yet, can't fulfill their murderous impulses because they don't have easy access to firearms. Or we assume they can illegally obtain firearms but don't kill each other at the rate we do.
We can therefore conclude that either strict gun control does work or Americans have a propensity for homicides that France, Germany and Belgium don't.
I would go back to my original question as to why we have such a high homicide rate to begin with?
Because of cultural problems, namely, gang warfare.
"PPS Isn't Sikhism a blend of Islam and Hinduism? Did a quick search and couldn't find anything conclusive."
Yes, Nanak did it to stop Hindus and Muslims in India from fighting. Originally and still essentially a warrior formation, make fine troops. Modernly, started independence movement in India, suppressed. Drove emmigration to here and elsewhere, heavily here. Commercially successful here, many as vegetarians. Yogi Bhajan from 60s/70s, Golden Temple Bakery, taxi companies, many other essential businesses.
Not originally a religion, more a self-defense movement for peace and reform amidst warring factions claiming mutually-exclusive religious exclusivity. They have no hegemonist intentions in USA, unlike Moslems, who do.
Traditional Guy wrote: Conservatives need to publicly renounce these guys in no mealy mouthed apologetics and join liberals in the fight to stop them.
That's pretty rich coming from the guy who apologized for the mob hounding Zimmerman.
Um, you can learn all about it on the Internet.
Yes indeed. I'll stand by my assertion that its easier and cheaper to buy a gun then build a fertilizer bomb.
Since there are more homicides commited by firearms than fertilizer bombs I suspect the homicidal maniacs think so too.
...as if it's not our responsability to speak out when they use violence against innocent groups...
Oh, here it is. How liberals "fight" neo-Nazis: by speaking out. Let have a protest march and chant slogans.
Let's have Democratic politicians speak at the rallies and promise to pass new laws. Since murder is already illegal, we have new laws making it super-duper illegal. That'll show those neo-Nazis.
Hey this fits in with the rule-breaking thread. Why do we have so many laws that people feel fine breaking them?
I'll stand by my assertion that its easier and cheaper to buy a gun then build a fertilizer bomb
If you're a convicted felon, it may be more difficult to buy a gun.
Since there are more homicides commited by firearms than fertilizer bombs I suspect the homicidal maniacs think so too
Exactly backwards.
Adding up all the yearly homicides and pretending they are committed by "maniacs" is silly.
Have these "spree shootings" that stretch back to the 1960's killed as many people as the OKC bombing?
No.
Conservatives need to publicly renounce these guys in no mealy mouthed apologetics and join liberals in the fight to stop them.
Why is that, tradguy? Nazis are Socialists. They are a product of the left, and informed by early 20th Progressive eugenicist policies.
It wasn't Conservatives who carried out the Tuskeegee experiments, pal.
I've yet to know a Conservative or Libertarian who sides with Neo-Nazis. Looks like you're doing your damnedest to pull off a Harry Reid.
On the other hand, there were plenty of skinheads hanging around OWS...
"I'm not advocating a ban, I'm simply saying its becoming very difficult being a gun rights supporter when we are presented with mass shootings every week."
Weasel words. False premises, non sequitur implications, dishonest self-representation, non-factual statistical references.
A real tour de force of malicious FUD.
"I only pointed to the mass shootings because we've had two in as many weeks. How do we prevent that? I have no idea."
Very simple. As I noted above, they stop when other firearms arrive. If other firearms are already at the targeted location, I assume it would make an attack much less likely, and greatly limit the damage done if it does happen. As a common-sense assumption, I will consider it valid until I see evidence to the contrary.
So, if this is a case of terrorism, can we rightly say that Obama didn't stop it?
(I go with nutcase.)
David R. Graham said...
Yes, Nanak did it to stop Hindus and Muslims in India from fighting. Originally and still essentially a warrior formation, make fine troops
Minorities in that part of the world learn that "those without swords can still die upon them" (apolgies to JRRT)
Two Sikh bodyguards put 31 rounds into indira Gandhi
I think the thing to say about this story is how horrible it is and how we are praying for and thinking of the Sikh people. I know several Sikhs and speak to them on a weekly basis. Our governor is from a Sikh family. They are honorable and decent people.
"Two Sikh bodyguards put 31 rounds into indira Gandhi"
Yes, over her policies towards Sikhs and other matters, such as her forcing sterilization. Not condoning, just mentioning response to persecution.
Something about reporting on this shooting in the Sikh temple feels off the truth to me. I don't know what the truth is there. I feel being lied to regarding it, and that's in addition to having to sort through the usual agenda-shaping, e.g., the perp is "Army."
Cui bono? News reports feel agenda-shaped by primary sources. Can't put my finger on specifics, just a feeling.
On the gun control aspect of this thread, I seem to recall guns are not the principal tool in murders but I forget the reference. Not even second place, as I recall. And, if an absence of guns diminishes harm, then USA should scrap its military and police in addition to confiscating civilians' firearms. Unilaterally. No one attacks unarmed individual, groups or nations. The Swiss, the least attacked nation in Europe, mandate every citizen own weapon, ammunition and knowledge of their use, to include in small unit tactics. Relatively peaceful country and social intercourse. They even have a lot of money and are trusted with far more.
Why aren't we more like the French, Belgians, Finns? you mean all those people who were run over by the Nazis? For one thing we kicked out a monarch and his aristocrats and declared ourselves equals under God and capable of governing ourselves. But that was only 236 years ago while the rest of Europe has been domesticated for a millennium or more. Aren't they really the descendants of serfs fundamentally? Americans are fundamentally the descendants of pioneers. We're self reliant and don't depend on others to do what we should be doing for ourselves (self defense). At least I hope so.
Europe has become so socialized and pacified and secular-humanized that it is drowning in its existential self doubt. Europe is barely able to recognize itself. Maybe by beginning to cope with the failures of multiculturalism, a theory by which they welcomed in a population who has an antithetical culture and is anti-democratic, anti-equality they will come around.
@ken in SC:
Amen, and for swift, certain justice for the victims and maybe scheduling a few extra patrols past the local Temples to check things out.
This isn't about Conservatives distancing or Garage working out his #RecallFAIL demons.
Why aren't we more like the French, Belgians, Finns? you mean all those people who were run over by the Nazis?
Let's not lump the Finns in particularly with the French. The Finns weren't "run over" by the Germans. They fought first the Soviets and then the Germans on their own.
I get the sense that many of these mass murderers have better than average intelligence. A lot of them certainly have advanced degrees in difficult subjects....They were sufficiently evil and intelligent to kill in other ways than gunfire. Poisoned reservoir, train derailment, Greyhound bus crash. It's not so hard to think up new ways of killing many people......Perhaps stricter gun control would inhibit a few impulse murderers, It would do damage to the 2nd amendment, but, on the margins, would cut down on gun homicides. But the same thing can be said about press coverage of these killers. The killers are not presented in a sympathetic light, but they are, nonetheless, illuminated. This publicity itself is a sufficent trigger for copycats. We cannot restrict coverage of these murderers without doing some damage to the 1st amendment. I think the publicity surrounding the Aurora shooter was part of the motivation for this current pos......Why is the 1st amendment so absolute vis a vis the 2nd.
The definition for a domestic terrorist is simple. It is a person who commits an act of terrorism (which is to say, a violent act carried out expressly to either sow fear or to further a political goal) in the country they are a citizen of. Anders Brevik was a domestic terrorist of Norway; the members of Jemaah Islamiya who carried out the Bali bombing were domestic terrorists of Indonesia; Timothy McVeigh was a domestic terrorist of the US, and Mr. Page here -an obvious white supremacist- can safely be assumed to have carried out this shooting for similar reasons.
So we have a simple, 2-part test for whether someone is a domestic terrorist or not. Part 1: Did they commit a terrorist act? Part 2: Are they domestic to the country where the attack took place? If the answer to both of those questions is "yes", as it seems likely in this case, then you have a domestic terrorist. My question to the writer and commentors of this blog is the exact opposite of that which you all seem to be obsessed with; in what way is he NOT a domestic terrorist?
Why do you feel comfortable assuming anything about this man and this event? I don't.
Ann if you can't figure out why they might consider it domestic terrorism I suggest you open another box of wine, get off the internets and go watch some more HGTV.
We have a black governor and the Mayor of my city is a Black Lezzie and we have a transgender on the board of select"men".
So there South Carolina. You look South Carolina.
A sad day for the victims' families, the community, and the country.
I didn't think of that. I didn't realize that Chicagoans were unable to leave the city and purchase a gun in Cicero.
Of course they can, but then what? How do they get it back home? At least in the past, my understanding is that used to be illegal.
Post a Comment