One man, completely by himself shot over a 100 people and killed almost half of them

[lunatica]

He killed 49 people and last I heard wounded 53 more.

One man. And. His. Guns.

He is defended for his right to have as many guns as he wished and as many as he could carry into the celebration. Defended for using his guns.

Defending this man is sick, perverted, degenerate, twisted, and deviant. It's inhuman. There are not enough words nor is there any single word that can describe the kind of person who would defend this act again and again.

[niyad]

1. a heartsick k and r.

[liberal N proud]

2. -

[bjobotts]

41. They don't defend this act only his right to acquire weapons.That is what needs to be regulated

His right to buy weapons of war. Close the gun show loopholes, ban assault weapons. extensive background checks. This "right" needs to be heavily regulated. Even if it saves just one life it's the right thing to do.

[liberal N proud]

43. Gun groupies claim the AR-15 is Not an assult weapon

I have had 3 of them set me straight on that one today.

Makes me shake my head

[Waldorf]

46. And they would be correct. It is not an assault weapon. That political word was created for these

rifles to make them sound like automatic military weapons. They are semi-automatic firearms, which means it fires one bullet with each pull of the trigger. Semi autos are available in pistols, rifles and shotguns.

An assault weapon is one that has a selective fire trigger group (used by the military/police). It can fire in semi-auto mode, then burst mode (3-rounds get fired with a trigger pull) and automatic mode (keeps firing with the trigger held until it runs out of ammunition).

[liberal N proud]

47. It doesn't stop

The gun apologist! another bloody massacre and another round of gun groupies making the same excuses.

No real solutions offered.

[hunter]

49. They all suck.

Piss on guns.

Gun fetishes are disgusting.

[PatrickforO]

50. Wa'al, everbudy noze Obama gonna take ur gunz!

Cuz Ay heered on talk rad-yo Obama one o' them soc-ial-ists.

My opinion? We need to get together and exert MASSIVE political pressure on these empty suits we elect to supposedly represent us in Washington DC, and if they won't roll over these ignorant fucks and put some serious gun control on the books then let's elect others who WILL have the spine to do so.

Because I am tired of having to dance to the tune of these gun nuts. They have been manipulated by consultants on K Street to fear losing their guns, and to hate the government. The people behind it? The very capitalists who are making these massacres possible with their greed. They want to sell, sell, sell more and more and more guns. They want every man, woman and child in this nation to have guns, because then their shareholders will make money and they can pay their CEOs stratospheric salaries. Because hey, look at all the value they create.

We must exercise our responsibility as citizens to FORCE this government, through the grassroots electoral process, to organize around human NEED instead of human GREED.

Because, hey, if it doesn't, if the oligarchs don't toss us some decent bones, it's going to be pitchforks. Fortunately, at age 57, I will probably be dead by the time it comes to that. No sane person wants to live through a fucking bloody revolution. But it's coming if we keep catering to these right wing ignoramuses. Let's roll over them and send them back under the rocks where they belong.

[AllyCat]

53. Every time I hear another gun lover argue the semantics

Of magazine, bullets, caliber, seni-auto or not, military-style or whatever as an argument after more people are gunned down by yet another gun lover, it makes me think maybe we do just need a complete ban on guns except for a select few rifles/shotguns for hunting.

[jack_krass]

63. I love how gun owners get more scorn on this board than the actual killer.

Talk about fucked up priorities and distractions

[Laha]

65. They don't get more scorn

They just get a lot of hate because defending the weapon at a time like this is truly fucked up.

And they really like to whine when they're confronted and called on their terrible arguments.

[jack_krass]

68. We are not defending guns, but pointing out the ridiculousness

And futility of trying to "cure" mass murder by fixating on guns, and ignoring the root causes.

Stop trying to claim moral high ground. You dont have it.

[Laha]

70. Futility

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-guns-idUSKCN0XP0HG




Bullshit.


Defending the weapon only deflects blame from the supporters of the environment that promotes these atrocities.

[LisaM]

80. That bothers me, too.

Deflect the argument to piddle over semantics. It's certainly what most people think of as an assault weapon. What's a better term for something that allows one person to single-handedly mow down 100 others?

[shenmue]

3. A lady named Bruinschick on Disqus is telling me it's not guns

[PJMcK]

4. It's not the guns

It's the nuclear weapons.



(sarcasm)

[HughBeaumont]

7. Yes, I imagine the same thing would have been accomplished with knives. Or lawn furniture.

Or several rocks.

Fucking RW asshats.

[Moostache]

25. Don't forget compound hunting bows...

That Hawkeye guy in the Avengers movies is totally deadly...

[JonathanRackham]

78. Technically bows were invented for killing.

Look at the artifacts of the cave dwellers.

[Laha]

81. But they are not efficient in the same manner as guns.

If you want to be realistic about it, when you're bow hunting you're probably going to have to spend some time tracking down a wounded animal. They just don't work the same and so it is not a meaningful comparison.

It's just another way to deflect the focus of the conversation and allow the people who support the proliferation of death machines to hide from the truth of their own sick fantasies.

[frankieallen]

57. or a home made bomb

[Laha]

82. Home made bombs require knowledge, practice and access to materials.

Not the same as walking into the store and purchasing a device over the counter that functions by pointing and clicking. Once again it is not a useful comparison.

[hrmjustin]

5. Yesterday I was stunned but today I am angry.

[linuxman]

6. Literally nobody is defending him here.

[lunatica]

8. Except the trolls

Who sign up in a drooling frenzy to defend him.

[linuxman]

10. Link ?

[lunatica]

12. I suggest you stick your head back into the ground

If you haven't seen posters and threads defending this man you haven't been here.

[linuxman]

15. I've read an awful lot posted here since yesterday.

I just want you to link to a post you consider "defending" the shooter, because I don't believe you.

If you're telling the truth it shouldn't be hard. If you can prove it, I'll apologize for doubting you.

Or is it that you can't do it because nobody defended him?

Prove me wrong. It's only a few clicks away, so you say...

[yallerdawg]

27. Linuxman - favorite group "Gun Control & RKBA"

Of course.

[linuxman]

28. Awww, does that sadden you?

Tough.

[yallerdawg]

30. "One man shoots one hundred people."

Doesn't bother you at all - the AR-15 operated as designed and marketed.

Doesn't sadden you at all, does it?

[linuxman]

32. It makes me very sad.

You know what else makes me sad?

Creepy busybody profile stalkers.

Go be creepy somewhere else.

[yallerdawg]

34. "Creepy busybody profile stalkers."

Worst gun violence in our history, and I am what bothers you?

Telling us no one is taking up for the mass murderer and we need to provide links if someone is - well, not anymore!

You got it covered!

[linuxman]

35. Then provide the link.

You cant.

I know you can't

You know you can't

Everyone knows you cant.



Weak.

[canuckledragger]

55. You'll just do what you're doing now.

Deny evidence in favour of personally attacking those that have a problem with any idiot full of hatred and prejudice getting a hold of your 'precious'.

[linuxman]

58. So in otherwords you couldn't link it either?

Look, I like being proved wrong. It means I learned something.

No evidence has been presented, which is weird considered how plentiful some of you claim it us. Just a few clicks and you could shut me up.

For some reason you'd rather tap away on your keyboard telling me you could TOTALY prove it, but actually doing so is just too darn difficult. What a load.

Facts talk, bullshit walks. Provide a link.

You wont. You cant.

Bye bye.

[canuckledragger]

59. That's right, bullshit walks.

Just like the way you're walking away now, and will always do so when the availability of your precious is questioned.

The point myself and others are making is that folks like yourself will NEVER accept any evidence. It's how you operate.

[linuxman]

60. Still empty-handed huh?

So sad.

I know it can be hard. I too find it difficult to produce evidence of stuff that only exists in my head. That's why I usually don't waste people's time insisting it's real.

Prove that point as well then. Kill two birds with one stone. Produce evidence of DUers defending Mateen, and prove that I'll never accept it by observing my reaction when you produce your evidence.

Or just keep on bullshitting yourself.

[canuckledragger]

61. Still in denial, huh?

I know it can be hard. You find it difficult to face evidence of stuff that easily and readily available for all to see. That's why you usually waste people's time insisting it's not real.

Every time a mass shooting happens (and there's been a LOT these past few years) gun-humpers like yourself deny any evidence placed in front of you that puts your precious in a bad light.

Just keep on doing what you're doing, bullshitting yourself and everyone else.

We're used to folks like you.

[linuxman]

62. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. YOU in this case.

You shouldn't have fallen asleep in your philosophy/rhetoric course or you'd know that.

I'll give you one last chance to redeem yourself. Provide a link supporting what you claim. If you cant, I have no choice but to conclude your just here to bullshit people and pad your post count.

Or, you know, just ramble on about evil gunz and throw a couple ad hominems at me. It's all you people ever have. Typical, but exoected. So far yout haven't failed to dissapoint.

I'm pretty sure I know which one it's going to be. You're more predictable than Christmas.

It never fails.

[canuckledragger]

66. It's all about projection with you ammosexuals.

As I've repeatedly stated, NO amount of evidence is good enough for you knobs, you'll just deny and personally attack those that disagree with you, as you've done throughout this thread.

Yes, you're completely predictable.

[linuxman]

69. Ammosexual?

Cute insult, especially in light of the slaughter that just took place in a gay bar.

I ask for evidence, you bring thinly veiled homophobic insults.


You are absolutely fucking digusting.

[canuckledragger]

75. And you are lying while pretending to be offended.

It's a common term used for yourself and your ilk, introduced by Bill Maher a few years back and used a lot here on DU.

If you've spent any amount of time here you'd have heard it before, and elsewhere. Hence you're lying about being offended, and lying about my intention behind using the phrase.

Yes, you ARE disgusting...and still sing the failed tactic of hurling baseless personal insults.

[linuxman]

95. No, I've heard it before.

It's no less a jab at someone by implying they are gay, and therefore presumably "Bad" in the eyes of the insulter.

I'm not offended personally. Just disgusted at your attempt at subtle homophobia in an attempt to insult me, especially given the events that have just unfolded.

Ask yourself if you'd call my gay, gun carrying coworkers "ammosexuals" to their faces. You might try.

Once.

The irony of you accusing me of using personal insults is too much. You can't figure out how to provide a link (must be too confusing for you), and you don't even possess enough self awareness to realize you're accusing me of doing something in the same breath that you yourself are doing it.


Go ahead and have the last word. I'm done sparring with crypto-homophobes.

[Duckhunter935]

33. Who?

I have not seen one post defending him. As a matter of fact most like font blame him for his actions but just put blame on the gun, an inanimate object.

[yallerdawg]

37. You see no correlation between...

the AR-15 and the recent spate of mass murders?

These psychos just happen to have an "inanimate object?"

Well, another forage out of "Guns & RKBA Group."

This is becoming a weekly occurrence now, isn't it?

[Duckhunter935]

38. I see one was used by a murderer

But most are with other weapons. The most being handguns. Rifles and the AR subclass of rifles are the least used. Of course with the wall to wall coverage that will make this ass some kind of hero to some, there might be more.

[yallerdawg]

40. The gun used in the Orlando shooting is becoming mass shooters’ weapon of choice

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/12/the-gun-used-in-the-orlando-shooting-is-becoming-mass-shooters-weapon-of-choice/?tid=pm_pop_b

One common denominator behind these and other high-casualty mass shootings in recent years is the use of assault style rifles, capable of firing many rounds of ammunition in a relatively short period of time, with high accuracy. And their use in these types of shooting is becoming more common: There have been eight high-profile public mass shootings since July of last year, according to a database compiled by Mother Jones magazine. Assault-style rifles were used in seven of those.

[aikoaiko]

48. ARs are becoming everyone's rifle of choice.

Its becoming very popular among collectors, recreational shooters, competitive shooters, and self-defense tacticians.

[jack_krass]

64. Nope not a fuking one. However, i see lots of misplaced hatred

[hunter]

51. But plenty of people defending their gun fetishes...

It's sick.

[KT2000]

76. that's what I see too

they have the need to drool over the fine details of weaponry and call those who question their fetish, ignorant. It is stomach turning to see those posts especially in the midst of a tragedy.

[mcar]

9. K&R

[NutmegYankee]

11. Nobody on DU is defending this man's act. NOBODY.

Some are defending rights that apply to all US citizens equally. People occasionally mix this up.

[lunatica]

13. People are defending his right to his guns

And if you don't know the difference then you're truly in denial.

[NutmegYankee]

14. Denial of what?

I see various debates going on about guns and gun laws. I also see debates about watch lists, which I've jumped into. None of which defend the act this man carried out.

[lunatica]

18. splitting hairs doesn't make it OK to defend his right to guns

Because it's implicit in your defense that he has the right to use them.

[NutmegYankee]

20. Not for criminal activity.

[anoNY42]

52. That's like saying

that defending the right to a free press is the same thing as defending a right to libel...

[shenmue]

17. Poor you

[NutmegYankee]

21. Why poor me?

[pandr32]

16. Wow!

Your headline made me realize that the idolatry of guns in the US and the resulting lack of common sense gun control is providing the perfect and somewhat ironic means for jihadists to kill lots of Americans right here at home--no suicide vests needed and just as many casualties.

They can use American culture (guns) to kill lots of Americans right here in America.

[Lizzie Poppet]

19. That's just it: he shouldn't have had that right.

The guy had issues that should have prevented him from buying firearms. Plenty of people noticed, too...but the system still failed to prevent the sale(s). The system breaks down when it comes to connecting these instances of a guy being flagged as someone obviously unsuited to possessing deadly weapons to the system's mechanism to prevent the transfer (the background check).

That's a two-part problem:
1) The list of things that disqualify someone from receiving a firearm is too narrow. Things like being under indictment/court order for domestic violence, certain mental health diagnoses, etc...all these need to flag the applicant as disqualified.
2) These flags need to make it into the NICS database used to conduct background checks. State-by-state reporting to NICS is inconsistent; some states do a terrible job.

Oh, yeah...and background checks should be universal: conducted for all transfers of ownership of firearms.

[Moostache]

29. Agree completely.

Those are all common sense compromises on gun ownership that make it more difficult for people to LEGALLY get guns. Criminals will get their guns on the black market, but that market gets much smaller when legitimate ownership becomes easier to track.

I would add bans on high-capacity magazines, bans on assault weapons, and require a license showing gun ownership, insurance to own such a weapon and to cover liability for its potential to harm innocent people if lost or stolen or used illegally, and finally require proof of insurance be presented alongside photo ID when purchasing any amount of ammunition. Those under 18 would only be allowed to use weapons under the supervision of a licensed adult in the case of rural areas, and the adult would assume all liability for the gun when in the hands of an unlicensed minor.

The fact that you need more government approval to FISH, DRIVE, MARRY, VOTE, or GET A LOAN is testament to the fact that our insane gun laws and their maniacal supporters in the NRA are simple amoral.

[AtheistCrusader]

44. We need to do something about violence against women, among other things.

There was a canary in the coal mine here, that was missed. His wife was beaten by him. Her family had to come rescue her from the situation. There was no conviction, no restraining order. Either would have flagged him as ineligible to purchase a firearm in all 50 states. Federal law, the Lautenberg amendment.

I want to know why it wasn't reported. Why he wasn't charged. What barriers existed that prevented her reporting his abuse to the police, and how can we remove those barriers.

One police report, one document could have prevented this attack, and it didn't happen, and I want to know why.

[CountAllVotes]

22. There was chat on yahoo last night

It was from a person that knew someone that took 12 bullets. Said person is still alive but claimed there were THREE shooters in the club. Two of them ran away heavily armed and the third was the one they caught and killed.

Is this true?

I do not know but the question keeps coming up, "How could one person shoot so many people in so short of a period of time?". Answer: No single person acting alone could do this but three could sure do it.

Statement also said they were not telling the public about it as they had no idea where the others are and they did not want to frighten the public.

So, a giant is what we have here and I tend to agree, it was a lot of shooting done to kill so many so quickly it seems.

[philosslayer]

23. If thats true it will be easy to determine

When the bullets are removed and evaluated.

[pinboy3niner]

74. The police have confirmed there was only one shooter

Orlando Police ?@OrlandoPolice · 20 hours ago

Alert: Rumors of multiple shooters are unfounded. The one shooter, Omar Mateen, is dead #OrlandoUnited

https://twitter.com/OrlandoPolice?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

[Laha]

24. Truth!

[patsimp]

26. I agree with you. So many people are trying to minimize, deflect and ignore the motivations

of this murderer. That's an insult to the victims and a recipe to enable future attacks.

[IronLionZion]

31. If these people joined in the last day or have low post counts

do you really think they are regular DUers? They just happened to get the urge to sign up for this board to post about this topic? The board has been overrun with trolls recently. Pay them no mind.

People who have been here a few years know that hatred and guns are a very dangerous combination.

[SheilaT]

36. Just think

of the ad campaign the manufacturer of his gun could run! The accuracy! The kill ratio!

I'm obviously being sarcastic, but if the gun makers were honest that's what they could do.

[Kablooie]

39. Guns don't kill, people do.

If he had been legally prevented from buying those weapons he would have gotten them some other way so we might as well not have laws that prevent guys like him from buying guns.

---

God, the NRA arguments are stupid!
How the hell can anyone accept this crap?

Oh, I know how.

"Hyuk! It's a passel o' fun to shoot off a hundered rounds in a few seconds. Sure glad them NRA guys are fightin' fer my right ta keep doin' it! Thankee NRA guys!"
signed:
Republercan voter ferever

[eppur_se_muova]

42. And yet DUer's own gun humpers are doing comparison shopping in these threads ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027908181

Scroll down to read the relative "merits" of the AR-15 compared to similarly effective killing machines, and why it's SOOOO important not to confuse an assault rifle with a deadly weapon, or something like that.

[leeroysphitz]

45. Military weapons belong in the military. n/t

[tclambert]

54. I was gonna make a joking comment about knives and stabbing

and his arm getting really, really tired to kind of satirize the typical gun supporter argument that knives can kill, too. But it just didn't seem funny.

[Dem2]

56. The gun-nuts tell me that the AR-15 was designed to 'injure' people

So clearly this didn't actually happen. As we all know, the only thing scary about an AR-15 (and similar) is it's black color.

[ManiacJoe]

71. That "scary" is easily fixed.

You can get an AR-15 in just about any color you want.

Other than that, there is nothing scary about an AR-15 that does not apply to any other gun.

[Dem2]

72. Other than it's a favorite of mass-murderers

So, one tends to be a little alarmed at it's effectiveness/popularity.

* easy and cheap to modify such that it handles like a large pistol (but much easier to hit a nearby target)
* large magazines cheap and plentiful
* ammo is relatively cheap compared to .308/7.62 and other higher power calibers.

[ManiacJoe]

73. Those are the same reasons as the law-abiding use.

However, the "handles like a large pistol" is far from cheap.

[Dem2]

83. So you favor keeping it easy for bad guys to get weapons perfect for mass-murder

So that "law-abiding" adult man-children can have toys that are designed to be upgradable to look like a cool military style weapon?

I'm a gun owner and have no desire for such a useless weapon in civilian life.

[ManiacJoe]

90. The Bad Guys are prohibited from all firearms

regardless of what the gun looks like.

If you don't want an AR-15 style rifle, don't buy one.

[Dem2]

97. Thanks for being in favor of mass murder

Just so you know, this gun owner just put you on ignore, I don't deal with people who are in favor of mass murder.

[ManiacJoe]

98. You really should have left your foot in your mouth.

Now everyone knows about you.

[ellenrr]

77. This is the assault rifle used by the Orlando shooter

"What the Orlando attacker used was a weapon of war. It was designed to kill as many people as possible, as quickly as possible. Witness this harrowing audio captured by a bystander outside the Pulse nightclub in which Omar Mateen fires 24 shots in 9 seconds."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/06/assault-rifle-used-by-orlando-mass-shooter

[ManiacJoe]

91. You seem to be suggesting that 24 rounds in 9 seconds is special.

All semi-auto rifles can do similar rates of fire.

[aikoaiko]

79. No one is defending his murders and attempted murders.

no one.

[Just reading posts]

84. I haven't seen a siingle post here defending the murderer.

[Pacifist Patriot]

85. Anyone who defends the right of individuals....

to own any gun(s) they want with little to no regulation is apparently comfortable with the idea of mass shootings. That takes a special kind of moral bankruptcy. They can argue with me all they want. But clinging to a misinterpretation of the second amendment as an excuse to allow private ownership of weaponry capable of this kind of carnage is acceptance of the inevitable slaughter of thousands and thousands of innocent lives. It's abhorrent.

[raccoon]

88. Great post. nt

[Boudica the Lyoness]

87. Bombs

They'll use bombs. ISIS is handy with bombs. Terrorists use planes as well.

I'll keep my gun to defend myself thank you very much!

[lunatica]

89. Did anyone suggest you shouldn't keep your gun?

I sure didn't. Unless it's an assault rifle.

Do you think it's OK that the murderer had one?

[Boudica the Lyoness]

94. It's a slippery slope.

You will come after my .38. Sure as shit stinks.

That killer should have been in prison years ago. His wife needs to be hanged for not telling anyone what his intentions were.

Bombs. How do you ban 'em? How?

[lunatica]

96. I won't come after your .38

I think you have the right to have it.

Gun owners paranoia is breathtaking.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

99. I'm not paranoid.

My .38 took care of that. I'm buying a Bushmaster next lol. I'm not be cowering in fear.

[bighart]

93. I was just looking at the FBI Stats on homicide

Just facts as known:

Total Homicides 64,852
Total Gun Homicides 44,047 67.9% of all homicides
Total Hand Gun Homicides 31,053 47.9% of all homicides
Total Rifle Homicides 1,633 2.5% of all homicides (assault rifles is a subset of this and not called out separately)
Total Knives or Cutting Instruments 8,378 12.9% of all homicides