Mass shooting in Orlando, Florida USA 20 dead

[kmoney]

It's not too hard to do a brainstorming on this:
Blanket ban on Muslims (except diplomats and country representatives) entering the country for 2 or 3 generations.
Blanket ban on Muslims obtaining firearms.
Amend the law/constitution to define Islam as not a religion, i.e. not benefitting from protections accorded to other religions.
Keep close tracks on on all Muslims having entered the country this generation. (This would perhaps have deterred the possibly lying father of the Florida terrorist from bringing up his son as a good Muslim to beat up his wife and hate America.)
No Muslim charities.

Etc., etc. I am sure you could think of more. Muslims need to be taught that when they come into our countries to live, they leave all aspects of their culture behind them that are incompatible with our own values. There will be no Sharia law practised in our countries, no polygamy, no honour killings or forced female circumcision for starters and no woman should be permitted to wear a full face cover.
It's not difficult to come up with suggestions when you are not inhibited by idealism.

In a different thread I came across this article. Just thought it'd go nicely here, next to these suggestions.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...en-carson/fact-checking-ben-carson-nazi-guns/

The Nazis adopted a new gun law in 1938. According to an analysis by Bernard Harcourt, a professor at Columbia University School of Law, it loosened gun ownership rules in several ways.

It deregulated the buying and selling of rifles, shotguns and ammunition. It made handguns easier to own by allowing anyone with a hunting license to buy, sell or carry one at any time. (You didn’t need to be hunting.) It also extended the permit period from one year to three and gave local officials more discretion in letting people under 18 get a gun.

The regulations to implement this law, rather than the law itself, did impose new limits on one group: Jews.

On Nov. 11, 1938, the German minister of the interior issued "Regulations Against Jews Possession of Weapons." Not only were Jews forbidden to own guns and ammunition, they couldn’t own "truncheons or stabbing weapons."

In addition to the restrictions, Ellerbrock said the Nazis had already been raiding Jewish homes and seizing weapons.

"The gun policy of the Nazis can hardly be compared to the democratic procedures of gun regulations by law," Ellerbrock told us. "It was a kind of special administrative practice (Sonderrecht), which treated people in different ways according to their political opinion or according to ‘racial identity’ in Nazi terms."

 

[jeffblue101]

I understand that and have argued that repeatedly here - but if someone is under investigation for terrorism, it should surely delay a gun purchase, shouldn't it?

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...un-control-terrorist-watch-lists-constitution

Simply making it onto the No Fly List, or any other of the government’s nebulous array of watch lists, does not mean your constitutional rights can be forfeited. Indeed, more than 1 million people are in the government’s central database of suspected terrorists. Many of them are mistakenly listed. It is abundantly clear that whatever the procedures for putting someone on a terror watch list are, they do not constitute due process. Accordingly, an individual cannot be deprived of their “life, liberty, or property” simply because the government suspects him of being a terrorist....


Ask yourself this: What happens when Donald Trump becomes president, and the precedent for denying people civil liberties according to their membership on a vaguely determined list has already been set?

 

[jeffblue101]

http://thefederalist.com/2016/06/13...estigation-should-lose-constitutional-rights/

If something horrifying happens, we must ignore due process and deny Americans their rights. To be safe. This was basically the argument many conservatives (and Democrats) made post-9/11 to help pass the Patriot Act, and it’s exactly the argument most liberals are making when they push gun bans to people on terror watch lists.

“If the FBI is watching you for suspected terrorist links,” Hillary Clinton said today in her supposedly apolitical speech, “you shouldn’t be able to just go buy a gun.”

If we’re going to do this, let’s be consistent.

If the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation of your suspected illegal use of a home email server to transmit classified intelligence, you shouldn’t be allowed to just go and run for president. Obviously. The idea that we would allow a person who can’t be trusted with our most vital secrets to hold the most powerful office in the nation is absurd. It’s just not safe.

It’s worse than that, actually. Being on a watch list would probably be best described—using Hillary’s own euphemism—as having a “security inquiry.” The Democratic Party nominee is under criminal investigation by the nation’s prime federal law enforcement agency. She’s practically guilty.

At last count there were over 700,000 people on the various terrorist watch lists. Most Americans still have no idea if they are on the list. They have no idea how someone gets on the terror list. They have no idea how someone gets off the list, either.

Here’s an exchange from a few years ago in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals:

Chief Judge Alex Kozinski had a simple question for the government attorney: what would you do if you found yourself on the No Fly List? After some hemming and hawing, the attorney said that he would seek “redress” from the Department of Homeland Security – even though DHS does not place people on the No Fly list and has no authority to remove them (that’s the FBI’s job). Because, the lawyer conceded, DHS would not be able to confirm or deny whether he was on the list, he would then seek review in a federal appellate court. And what would the court be able to do?, asked Judge Kozinski. Not much, said the government lawyer. In fact, the lawyer would not even concede that a federal court possessed the authority to order someone removed from the No Fly List.

 

[annabenedetti]

If they are that dangerous and suspected of supporting terrorism and/or trying to commit a terrorist act themselves, arrest them and put them in jail to await a trial.

There's a difference between being arrested before you've committed a crime or without due process - and having to wait out a hold.

I'm not trying to be obtuse, I want to come down on the side of the constitution.

 

[annabenedetti]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/436562/orlando-shooting-gun-control-terrorist-watch-lists-constitution

Ask yourself this: What happens when Donald Trump becomes president, and the precedent for denying people civil liberties according to their membership on a vaguely determined list has already been set?

I completely agree. I said as much in another post elsewhere.

 

[Crucible]

Amend the law/constitution to define Islam as not a religion, i.e. not benefitting from protections accorded to other religions.

:doh:
I hate pine cones, therefore I declare pine trees to not be trees- they are big, giant shrubs.

Yeah, let's sabotage our own honor, that'll get 'em.

 

[Traditio]

Most murders in this country aren't committed by Muslims.

Nope. That would be black people (I use this euphemism, of course, solely to avoid offending the moderators).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States#Homicide

As I said. We don't have a gun problem in this country.

But I do have a solution to the real problem that we have. It involves an entire fleet of leaky wooden boats.

At any rate, Town Heretic, I'm afraid that you misrepresent my intent. If we attend to serious terror incidents as displayed in the cases of, say, San Bernardino, Orlando, Cologne, etc., then, again, the problem isn't guns. It's Muslims.

And once again, I have a solution to this problem. It involves an entire fleet of leaky...

In case I'm being too subtle:

Ship every non-Christian, non-white, non-socially conservative person in this country back to Africa.

Maybe then we can start recovering, as a nation, from the horrible trends that we've been facing since the unfortunate end of the civil war.

Most Muslims aren't from Africa.

1. I'm sorry, I fail to see how this prevents us from shipping them back there...

2. I have the middle east in mind (though the overtones, of course, to what I am saying have nothing to do with Islam or the middle east, as I'm sure you've understood well by now).

 

[Town Heretic]

Nope. That would be black people (I use this euphemism, of course, solely to avoid offending the moderators).

You mean you lack the courage of your conviction at cost, what follows from you making a prima facie case that offense isn't remotely troubling to you.

As I said. We don't have a gun problem in this country. But I do have a solution to the real problem that we have. It involves an entire fleet of leaky wooden boats.

So boats that resemble your thinking on religion and race. Noted.

At any rate, Town Heretic, I'm afraid that you misrepresent my intent. If we attend to serious terror incidents as displayed in the cases of, say, San Bernardino, Orlando, Cologne, etc., then, again, the problem isn't guns. It's Muslims.

Only if you don't understand what the numbers actually tell you. There is a problem within a certain segment of Islam. But that doesn't suit your racist mindset, which corrupts your reason and reduces your advances to a mere semblance of rationality, sadly.

And once again, I have a solution to this problem. It involves an entire fleet of leaky...

Yes, yes, you've taken your leak enough around here, I believe.

In case I'm being too subtle:

I'm mostly amazed you can spell it.

Ship every non-Christian, non-white, non-socially conservative person in this country back to Africa.

Maybe then we can start recovering, as a nation, from the horrible trends that we've been facing since the unfortunate end of the civil war.

The most unfortunate thing associated with that war is how many people failed to understand its lessons or profit from the wisdom produced by the suffering and struggle of so many. In case you missed the point of that I mean people like you...for all your education your understanding and rhetoric are indistinguishable on the point from some similarly ignorant cracker pulling potatoes in a field.

1. I'm sorry, I fail to see how this prevents us from shipping them back there...

Nothing other than a lack of means and ability prevents any man from doing something stupid...and you're making a fine case that even that isn't necessarily a bar.

 

[Traditio]

Only if you don't understand what the numbers actually tell you. There is a problem within a certain segment of Islam. But that doesn't suit your racist mindset, which corrupts your reason and reduces your advances to a mere semblance of rationality, sadly.

Sure, TH, keep telling yourself that. All of you liberals can keep insisting that muslims are not a threat. You can keep insisting that Islam does not exist outside of the practice of individual muslims. You can keep pretending that Islam does not in and of itself promote and lead to violence.

Keep chanting that lullaby.

And keep ignoring the fact that innocent white people and Christians keep getting killed by muslims.

You keep doing that. But I'll likely be voting for Trump.

Yes, yes, you've taken your leak enough around here, I believe.

I'm mostly amazed you can spell it.

Touche! Ever the lawyerly wit.

The most unfortunate thing associated with that war is how many people failed to understand its lessons or profit from the wisdom produced by the suffering and struggle of so many.

I completely agree with you.

Were it otherwise, the nation (or, at least, the southern half) would be flying the stars and bars right now.

 

[Tinark]

There's a difference between being arrested before you've committed a crime or without due process - and having to wait out a hold.

I'm not trying to be obtuse, I want to come down on the side of the constitution.

If being on this list removes someone's rights/freedoms, then there needs to be due process, a right to defend oneself from inclusion on this list in an impartial hearing/trial, etc. and guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[Town Heretic]

Sure, TH, keep telling yourself that.

When a conclusion follows reason I'll keep telling anyone who asks.

All of you liberals can keep insisting that muslims are not a threat.

Trying to hang that label on me is about as silly as Pure repeatedly calling me a self righteous apologist for the religious right. Else, the overwhelming majority of Muslims demonstrably aren't a threat. That's not a liberal position. It's a rational one supported by logic and demonstrable to anyone who is capable of giving the matter serious consideration.

You can keep insisting that Islam does not exist outside of the practice of individual muslims

Rather, Islam exists outside of the myopic focus you're attempting to use to define it.

You can keep pretending that Islam does not in and of itself promote and lead to violence.

It would be irrational to hold a contrary view given that the overwhelming majority of adherents are not involved in violence.

Keep chanting that lullaby.

I haven't, but if you insist on holding onto childish things I might consider putting reason to music.

And keep ignoring the fact that innocent white people and Christians keep getting killed by muslims.

A lot of people have been killed by radical Islam. Most of the victims have been neither white nor Christian.

You keep doing that. But I'll likely be voting for Trump.

Somewhere, Hillary smiled in her sleep.

Touche! Ever the lawyerly wit.

It's mostly a trial lawyer thing. Tax, contract, corporate...they're about as wry as Wonder Bread.

I completely agree with you.

If only that were true...you need to go to war with this sin you've cultivated. It will corrupt and ruin every meaningful thing about you.

Were it otherwise, the nation (or, at least, the southern half) would be flying the stars and bars right now.

As I said once before, if you took every monument and flag raised on behalf of that cause and threw them into the ocean I'd only feel sorry for the creatures who lived in it.

 

[chair]

Ship every non-Christian, non-white, non-socially conservative person in this country back to Africa.

At least you're honest about your ideology. Now you'll have to get down to the details of defining "white" and "socially conservative".
Blacks and Hispanics are clearly not "white". Jews probably not either. How about Greeks or Italians? What do you do with people of mixed background? Can only WASPs stay- if so, Catholics should pack their bags. Did I mention Navajo? They are definitely not white.
I guess anybody who voted for Obama is not "socially conservative", so there go a few million more, even if they are the right race.
You'll need an investigative team to determine what people's official race is. And maybe people will testify about how their neighbors voted, or what their social views are.
Then special police to round up all these millions of people and ship them other countries, which may or may not be interested in having them.

Do you want to live in a country where all this is going on?

 

[Desert Reign]

In a different thread I came across this article. Just thought it'd go nicely here, next to these suggestions.

That's an excellent argument. Just compare your opponent to Nazis and the argument is all yours. I really can't believe I am reading this. From supposedly mature adults.

:doh:
I hate pine cones, therefore I declare pine trees to not be trees- they are big, giant shrubs.

Excellent, you're getting the idea now as well. As human beings, we are free to define things how we like. And those pesky pines were just encroaching everywhere, damaging the roads, railways, people's homes. It was a shame that we had laws protecting trees but at least we now see sense and can get rid of the invaders. And they grow up so innocently and when they are small you can cut them down for Christmas trees. But then, 20 years later, they have become so rooted that you cannot get rid of them for love nor money.
Yes, I'm glad you are beginning to see this now.

 

[Nick M]

According to a survivor, a black female, the muslim told her he isn't going to shoot her because she isn't white.

 

[annabenedetti]

If being on this list removes someone's rights/freedoms, then there needs to be due process, a right to defend oneself from inclusion on this list in an impartial hearing/trial, etc. and guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

I've been trying to figure out how the terror watch list works. Here's some of what I'm finding, and I'm not sure it's 100% accurate, so definitely open to to fact-checking.

For clarification, the terms terror watch list and no-fly list are often used interchangeably, but they're not the same, the no-fly list is a subset of the terror watch list.
Decisions are made about people on the terror watch list through the powers of the executive branch alone.
The language of the terror watch list (criteria for inclusion on it) is secretive, vaguely defined, and imprecisely applied.
Arguments for and against the watch list aren't strictly divided down ideological lines, liberal and conservative sources argue both ways.

 

[shagster01]

Mass murderers usually are.

Yet they shoot places like gay bars, planned parenthood, and public schools with guns that democrats want banned.

I'm a registered republican, not because I am one, but because I want some say in their nominees. Maybe they are the same with democrats...

 

[Stripe]

There shouldn't be a debate over the affiliations of a murderer; whatever they are, they should all be executed swiftly, publicly and painfully if the police fail to kill them.

 

[annabenedetti]

That's an excellent argument. Just compare your opponent to Nazis and the argument is all yours. I really can't believe I am reading this. From supposedly mature adults.

Invoking Godwin's Law can be used to obscure valid historical comparisons.

Excellent, you're getting the idea now as well. As human beings, we are free to define things how we like. And those pesky pines were just encroaching everywhere, damaging the roads, railways, people's homes. It was a shame that we had laws protecting trees but at least we now see sense and can get rid of the invaders. And they grow up so innocently and when they are small you can cut them down for Christmas trees. But then, 20 years later, they have become so rooted that you cannot get rid of them for love nor money.
Yes, I'm glad you are beginning to see this now.

I wonder if some indigenous peoples wouldn't love your metaphor when considering colonialism under the mantle of manifest destiny...

 

[Crucible]

If they are that dangerous and suspected of supporting terrorism and/or trying to commit a terrorist act themselves, arrest them and put them in jail to await a trial.

And who exactly makes that judgement?

Here's the problem:
When you give government a power such as that, you give them the authority to essentially silence or arrest anyone- including patriots and otherwise law abiding citizens with grievances with the way the country is going.

These things endanger the bounds placed by American ideology. For the same reason, this is why America doesn't want things like gun registration or arms control.

 

[Nick M]

Do you want to live in a country where all this is going on?

Yes, he does.