I'm curious about how this guy doesn't represent Islam at all, yet he does somehow reflect legal gun owners in the US?
I believe it is being discussed that he did in fact affiliate himself with radical Islam. I think the "radical" sect is very different from the general Islamic population as they advocate the violence and killing. American citizen or not when a guy says he supports and identifies with a group who advocates the killing of innocent Americans then how can he possibly be cleared to purchase an AR-15? That is a very broken ideology.
But, there seems to strong evidence indicating that the radical views we associate as being held by only a tiny proportion of the general Islamic population has become far more commonplace in the "general" community:
I have deliberately chosen not to respond to Daves post other than my condolences as i felt it was aimed at those of us who decided the 2nd ammendment is a right. That being said I cannot disagree with his aggravation and amazement at what has happened to Americans from those who would chose to hurt us. If it was only so easy, do this and do that to stop the bloodshed without taking away the given rights we have worked for we would all most likely agree, especially if we thought there were not a couple hundred political agendas attached to the idea...But (And this is truly my opinion) we know better and expect the pundits to cascade on the tragedy. One example is on another forum I visit ( A sports forum none less) there is an over/under wager on how many shootings will happen between now and the election to push the anti-gun agenda...We have become such a cynical populace that we feel this is all part of a greater agenda of social engineering that it is expected...I have to point out I am an old man in the forum where most are attorneys and doctors in there late 20's and early 30's, so highly educated, successful and not your tobacco chewing redneck most liberals want to paint as the opposition. First item, Scott pointed out correctly that what is being pictured as an assault weapon is a glorified rifle. Assault weapons are by engineering capable of dispensing multiple rounds by pulling the trigger ONE time and emptying a magazine, sorry this is military and not for sale to the public. Public rifles, this: Or this: Are the exact same item, one is embellished to look military and the other is what we consider a hunting rifle. This calms us as either we have one, have shot one or grandpa had one when he took us hunting. It is wood, we recognize it so it must be safer. The other is black, and looks much like what we expect in war time exercises..The reality is they are identical in every way from a ballistic standpoint. The only difference is the expanded magazine of the military knockoff, it has 20-30 rounds versus 5-7 rounds. They both point and shoot and to be honest the wood version is probably more accurate... So now another terrible tragedy has occurred and I mean terrible, as the days go by the news agencies will relish in giving us the sultry details. People were ambushed by in all respects a man who hated gays, yeah this will be painted as a terrorist action but holy shyt, when the guy calls 911 during his killing spree to say he is with ISiS I have to call bullshyt...He had hate for those who were not heterosexual... The question is how will this be treated, I've been home 90 minutes and watched three national news stations sharing the ideology that guns are bad, need to be controlled by the government and a change to the 2nd ammendment must happen soon...No five minute segments on how people that hate can kill or how a leader of Islam called this glorious...Is this because there may be an agenda or two laying in wait or am I just a paranoid cynical old fart out of touch with reality... I do know this, my heart goes out to the families and lost ones who were innocently murdered by a man who wanted to kill...
No Ralph, you are far from a paranoid cynical fart. EVERY story being aired is about the gun. Little is being said about the maniac that killed 50. I wonder how this would be different if he had stolen an armored car and driven it through the place at 60mph? In any case, as you said a tool is being vilified and compared to military hardware. I even read a story that claimed the AR-15 has been in military service for years. Idiots. The only real difference between the two guns below is the barrel length and as noted mag size. Almost all hunting rifles have a 20 inch or longer barrel while almost all AR's are carbine length - 16 inches. This makes them less accurate, but lighter and easier to maneuver. The guts of the two guns are the same. No AR-15 can fire full automatic, but that doesn't stop the agenda driven folks from saying they can. If called on it they will feign ignorance while continuing the lie.
You guys make it sound complicated.... which is the precise reason new gun controls are never enacted much to the delight of the NRA and the far right. It's very simple.... questionable people who may have inclination to kill people should never be allowed to purchase firearms legally.
It's actually not complicated, before one opens his or her mouth they should have their facts straight but this has never been about the truth it has been about social engineering by the liberal left looking for any and all opportunities to enact gun control. Dave we are in agreement that questionable people who have inclination to kill should never be allowed to purchase firearms, I don't think you would get any argument from this. This obvious point should include knives, baseball bats, automobiles, pressure cookers, box cutters, Facebook accounts, Internet access as they can all be dangerous tools if the person is unstable. But if our esteemed FBI with the full weight of the United States of America behind them did not see this coming after researching the guy for a good amount of time how would anyone else know he was going to do this.??
There needs to be strong laws on the books that would compel the FBI to have that individual placed immediately on an unable to purchase list. Yes knives are available but always guns seem to be the weapon of choice for mass murder in this country. Why make it easy?
Dave, Do you realize what you are condoning? You are saying its OK to remove a citizen's rights based on the perceived probabilty they MIGHT commit a crime... That is a VERY dangerous precedent to set and would inevitably cross into other areas of law. BTW... it turns out the weapon used by the Orlando shooter was NOT an AR15. Will we see any big retractions of the stories released about how the AR is the mass murders friend? I didn't think so...
Anyone that is causing suspicion enough to be twice investigated by the FBI for possible terroristic ties or views forfeits his right to own a gun. Seems logical enough....whereas selling that same individual semi-automatic weapons that can fire multiple rounds seems insane.
This is the big bad wolf hiding in the closet, the precedent as Scott described is beyond frightening in this era where both the left and right ideologies are at polar opposites. Can you imagine a McCarthy type witch hunt led by Elizabeth Warren and others scouring data bases looking for those opposed to their train of thought. On the other hand the hard right conservatives would be just as scary if given such power... Its turning out that this guy visited this club several times and was on gay websites for dating. It sounds as if he was very confused to his identity and angry beyond measure...And no I guarantee there will be no retractions given to the type of weapon used...
So it's looking more like sick.... mentally deranged with a hint of terrorism tied to radical Islamic beliefs. A perfect candidate to sell lethal weapons to.... 8)
Obama said he was radicalized by the internet. Following the logic of the moronic, he should never have had access to the internet and the real culprit in all this is Al Gore.
Dave, I'm guessing you believe a change such as you suggest would only be applied to guns but that is very short sighted. Once you've made that leap it is easy to apply everywhere. Next the Gov't can say you seem likely to yell fire in a crowded theater because your were friends with someone who has. You are now banned from movie theaters... Please don't pretend that outcome is impossible... We already have.cities restricting the size of soft drinks we can buy because they know what's best for us and I would never have believed that...
I'm sorry but I cannot equate yelling fire in a crowded theatre or restricting soft drink sales to be the same as 50 people getting slaughtered in a club. Until we throw out the incessant political rhetoric nothing will change and will probably just get worse. So sit back and observe the carnage and just pray it never happens to anyone you know.
Alright Dave, how about this: They investigated this joker, and found that he was OK to buy a gun. HUGE MISTAKE. Proof that our systems are very fallible. Turn it around the way you want it. They investigate ME with that same fallible system... and find that I am not worthy, even tho I have never even committed a misdemeanor... And they deny me my rights based on someone's perception of me. By your rules that is totally acceptable. I'm pretty sure I know the answer, but I will go through the formality of asking just to be clear: You would be OK with that?
First things first, I almost wrecked my truck laughing at this gipper, Al Gore is not appreciating the humor I'm sure....
Second thing is here is one small example of what the Dems continue to say is not a possibility as they do NOTHING to discredit such articles, interviews or movements. But a smirking Obama will gleefully take the time to poke fun at people who are ignorant enough to believe there are agendas to change it once and for all... http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-its-time-to-repeal-the-second-amendment-right-bear-arms-20160613
Last item, Dave what do you propose the answer is, the FBI cannot tell who may cause bodily harm to individuals, pretty sure any other governing board will not do any better, I'm hoping you have the answer as you are extremely vocal about the current situation.. What is the answer to this issue, no more guns, no more hatred, smaller ammo magazines, psychiatric test for every gun owner, religious testing to see if they are radicalized, no more ammo....Where does it start and where does it end and who is in charge of those decisions...If we empower a task force does it end with guns, maybe it goes deeper crossing over to the IRS, Homeland security, the DOJ, does it look at families who deal with depression, does it snag all immigrants, what if they have guns and don't lean left or right in ideology but God forbid think for themselves, they must be a danger to the greater good... Serious and no bullshyt, what do you propose...
What you're saying Dave is that anyone under investigation by the FBI should not be allowed to buy a gun. Fair enough, now how can someone under investigation by the FBI be running for President of the United States? As someone said SICK