Multiple victims in a "mass shooting" at Orlando club.

The_Dude wrote:Liberals: The guy who commits rape is 100% at fault. Its the person.

When it comes to terrorism: Lets blame guns, the NRA, Republicans, etc. The person and their own faults are NOT to be blamed, or really talked about.

Isn't blatant political hypocrisy the greatest?

DWags wrote:

Blanch32 wrote:Why can I quote anyone any more?

Love the back and forth with loose and bob.


Looses, defends due process unless it involvea banning moose and others he doesn't like here

Bob, blames guns, not the shooter, yet thinks the compete opposite if it was rape....then only the rapist can be blamed.


See why the left and right are both morans?

Exactly who else is to be blamed?

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

The_Dude wrote:Liberals: The guy who commits rape is 100% at fault. Its the person.

When it comes to terrorism: Lets blame guns, the NRA, Republicans, etc. The person and their own faults are NOT to be blamed, or really talked about.

Isn't blatant political hypocrisy the greatest?

I think it's fair to say that when people blame the rapist for rape they are also blaming his weapon of choice...

The_Dude wrote:Liberals: The guy who commits rape is 100% at fault. Its the person.

When it comes to terrorism: Lets blame guns, the NRA, Republicans, etc. The person and their own faults are NOT to be blamed, or really talked about.

Isn't blatant political hypocrisy the greatest?

DWags wrote:Dude,

We all know you're an asshole, that isn't in doubt here, but I'll blame the Rapists Weapon if you'd like me to. I also say we should eliminate it after the act that he's found guilty of. Would you join me in that? Does that make me liberal?

You can't really be this kind of dumb ass.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:I had posted this on the other forum.. seems rather appropriate for here:

Bobby Sak wrote:I was on a long ride yesterday afternoon and thinking that the shooting in Orlando had to have been just an amazing moment for the Republican party. First of all, a bunch of gay folks at a gay nightclub were killed... secondly, they could blame it on scary brown people...

can you imagine the high-fiving going on at Trump/RNC headquarters?

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

The_Dude wrote:Liberals: The guy who commits rape is 100% at fault. Its the person.

When it comes to terrorism: Lets blame guns, the NRA, Republicans, etc. The person and their own faults are NOT to be blamed, or really talked about.

Isn't blatant political hypocrisy the greatest?

I think it's fair to say that when people blame the rapist for rape they are also blaming his weapon of choice...

DWags wrote:Just for the dumb asses on this board, and the more I read them the less I'm shocked that an idiot like Trump is going to be our president, but to be sure, many people on this board blame access to guns, they don't blame the "guns".

DWags wrote:Dude,

We all know you're an asshole, that isn't in doubt here, but I'll blame the Rapists Weapon if you'd like me to. I also say we should eliminate it after the act that he's found guilty of. Would you join me in that? Does that make me liberal?

You can't really be this kind of dumb ass.

Blanch32 wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

I think it's fair to say that when people blame the rapist for rape they are also blaming his weapon of choice...

Alcohol? Wait, that's victim shaming!!! Get him!!

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Blanch32 wrote:

Alcohol? Wait, that's victim shaming!!! Get him!!

No. His penis. Or fingers. Some part of his body is what did the raping is what I'm saying. Just so we're clear.

What a difference a year makes. Here are the editors of the New York Times in 2014, in an editorial titled “Terror Watch Lists Run Amok.”

After eight years of confounding litigation and coordinated intransigence, the Justice Department this week grudgingly informed Rahinah Ibrahim, a Malaysian architecture professor, that she was no longer on the federal government’s vastly overbroad no-fly list.

“Confounding litigation.” “Coordinated intransigence.” “Vastly overbroad.” That’s pretty strong stuff, all told. And it’s nothing compared to what comes next:

How can Dr. Ibrahim be a terrorist and not be a threat at the same time? Welcome to the shadowy, self-contradictory world of American terror watch lists, which operate under a veil of secrecy so thick that it is virtually impossible to pierce it when mistakes are made. A 2007 audit found that more than half of the 71,000 names then on the no-fly list were wrongly included.

“Shadowy.” “Self-contradictory.” “A veil of secrecy so thick that it is virtually impossible to pierce it when mistakes are made.” More:

In a recently unredacted portion of his January ruling, Judge Alsup noted that in 2009 the government added Dr. Ibrahim back to its central terrorist-screening database under a “secret exception” to its own standard of proof. This would be laughable if it weren’t such a violation of basic rights. A democratic society premised on due process and open courts cannot tolerate such behavior. “Such a violation of basic rights.” “A democratic society premised on due process and open courts cannot tolerate such behavior.”

Except, that is, when that “behavior” might be used indefinitely to restrict an enumerated constitutional right that the Times’s editors and readers happen to dislike. Here are the same people just a year later:

While the nation suffered through the shock of another bloody massacre, on Thursday every Senate Republican except Mark Kirk of Illinois voted against legislation to prevent people on the F.B.I.’s consolidated terrorist watchlist from purchasing guns or explosives.

By the Times’s own standards, the GOP’s skepticism was sensible no? Surely, it would be downright outrageous to allow the Bill of Rights to be compromised by the “the shadowy, self-contradictory world of American terror watch lists, which operate under a veil of secrecy so thick that it is virtually impossible to pierce it when mistakes are made”?

LooseGoose wrote:I see Schumer is now blatting about the no fly or terror lists.....although the discussion here has gone downhill if anyone is interested in reading objections to that idea here's an article:

From last December:

What a difference a year makes. Here are the editors of the New York Times in 2014, in an editorial titled “Terror Watch Lists Run Amok.”

After eight years of confounding litigation and coordinated intransigence, the Justice Department this week grudgingly informed Rahinah Ibrahim, a Malaysian architecture professor, that she was no longer on the federal government’s vastly overbroad no-fly list.

“Confounding litigation.” “Coordinated intransigence.” “Vastly overbroad.” That’s pretty strong stuff, all told. And it’s nothing compared to what comes next:

How can Dr. Ibrahim be a terrorist and not be a threat at the same time? Welcome to the shadowy, self-contradictory world of American terror watch lists, which operate under a veil of secrecy so thick that it is virtually impossible to pierce it when mistakes are made. A 2007 audit found that more than half of the 71,000 names then on the no-fly list were wrongly included.

“Shadowy.” “Self-contradictory.” “A veil of secrecy so thick that it is virtually impossible to pierce it when mistakes are made.” More:

In a recently unredacted portion of his January ruling, Judge Alsup noted that in 2009 the government added Dr. Ibrahim back to its central terrorist-screening database under a “secret exception” to its own standard of proof. This would be laughable if it weren’t such a violation of basic rights. A democratic society premised on due process and open courts cannot tolerate such behavior. “Such a violation of basic rights.” “A democratic society premised on due process and open courts cannot tolerate such behavior.”

Except, that is, when that “behavior” might be used indefinitely to restrict an enumerated constitutional right that the Times’s editors and readers happen to dislike. Here are the same people just a year later:

While the nation suffered through the shock of another bloody massacre, on Thursday every Senate Republican except Mark Kirk of Illinois voted against legislation to prevent people on the F.B.I.’s consolidated terrorist watchlist from purchasing guns or explosives.

By the Times’s own standards, the GOP’s skepticism was sensible no? Surely, it would be downright outrageous to allow the Bill of Rights to be compromised by the “the shadowy, self-contradictory world of American terror watch lists, which operate under a veil of secrecy so thick that it is virtually impossible to pierce it when mistakes are made”?

The New York Times and President Obama Indulge their Inner Jekyll and Hyde

Orlando Police Chief John Mina said an off-duty police officer working security at the club in uniform traded gunfire with the attacker.

Officials said that after police responded to reports of the violence, the attacker retreated to a bathroom with hostages. Police held back because the attacker made statements about having explosives, they said.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:and, remember, the only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun...

oh.. wait..

Orlando Police Chief John Mina said an off-duty police officer working security at the club in uniform traded gunfire with the attacker.

Officials said that after police responded to reports of the violence, the attacker retreated to a bathroom with hostages. Police held back because the attacker made statements about having explosives, they said.

LooseGoose wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:and, remember, the only thing that will stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun...

oh.. wait..

Too bad that guy tried to help, he could have just been a smart ass on a message board and done much more.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Too bad that guy tried to help, he could have just been a smart ass on a message board and done much more.

He was a good guy with a gun. He just couldn't stop a bad guy with a gun.

I would actually argue that the smart ass on a message board is more effective. At least the smart ass on the message board doesn't pretend that he's there to perteckt. And the smart ass on the message board isn't a pawn being used by the NRA - America's terrorist organization.

LooseGoose wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
He was a good guy with a gun. He just couldn't stop a bad guy with a gun.

I would actually argue that the smart ass on a message board is more effective. At least the smart ass on the message board doesn't pretend that he's there to perteckt. And the smart ass on the message board isn't a pawn being used by the NRA - America's terrorist organization.

Yes, you're a fucking hero.

Rocinante wrote:M'famlee

The_Dude wrote:Liberals: The guy who commits rape is 100% at fault. Its the person.

When it comes to terrorism: Lets blame guns, the NRA, Republicans, etc. The person and their own faults are NOT to be blamed, or really talked about.

Isn't blatant political hypocrisy the greatest?

kingstonlake wrote:

The_Dude wrote:Liberals: The guy who commits rape is 100% at fault. Its the person.

When it comes to terrorism: Lets blame guns, the NRA, Republicans, etc. The person and their own faults are NOT to be blamed, or really talked about.

Isn't blatant political hypocrisy the greatest?

When all you really need is a proper ID to go out and buy a gun and commit mass murder, yeah, I blame the process and ease with which the government has made it to it as well as the person who did it.

kingstonlake wrote:

The_Dude wrote:Liberals: The guy who commits rape is 100% at fault. Its the person.

When it comes to terrorism: Lets blame guns, the NRA, Republicans, etc. The person and their own faults are NOT to be blamed, or really talked about.

Isn't blatant political hypocrisy the greatest?

When all you really need is a proper ID to go out and buy a gun and commit mass murder, yeah, I blame the process and ease with which the government has made it to it as well as the person who did it.

The_Dude wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:

When all you really need is a proper ID to go out and buy a gun and commit mass murder, yeah, I blame the process and ease with which the government has made it to it as well as the person who did it.

Politicians have sold out the citizenry for years. Hilary has made a living off of that. Trump will draw the line and has a backbone unlike the rest of the limp wristed politicians.

LooseGoose wrote:Interesting that Hillary is supporting a ban on selling guns to those under investigation by the FBI.

Wonder how she feels about being able to run for President while under investigation by the FBI?

The_Dude wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:

When all you really need is a proper ID to go out and buy a gun and commit mass murder, yeah, I blame the process and ease with which the government has made it to it as well as the person who did it.

Politicians have sold out the citizenry for years. Hilary has made a living off of that. Trump will draw the line and has a backbone unlike the rest of the limp wristed politicians.

LooseGoose wrote:Interesting that Hillary is supporting a ban on selling guns to those under investigation by the FBI.

Wonder how she feels about being able to run for President while under investigation by the FBI?

kingstonlake wrote:

The_Dude wrote:

Politicians have sold out the citizenry for years. Hilary has made a living off of that. Trump will draw the line and has a backbone unlike the rest of the limp wristed politicians.

Has Trump finally figured out the shooter wasn't raised in Afghanistan? He's a smart fella.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Okay I think we can move this now. I can't move it back so if you get mad at me then you can just go suck it.