Gunman opens fire in Florida nightclub, many dead

[Harbornite]

Interesting comparing the Leytonstone stabbling (one lone islamic ****) with this attack (one lone islamic ****)

But hey, on December 14, 2012 there were two school attacks. Sandy Hook in the US, 28 dead, and Chenpeng Village in China, 0 dead.

I'm struggling to see why the deaths occur in the US and elsewhere it's just injuries.

Guns? Having said that, I'm not really sure what your point is because people do get killed in attacks overseas.

 

[DarloRich]

are no more important than other human beings.

Human history has shown so far that we should not be surprised to see periodic mass killings and other atrocities. These happen even in traditionally more peaceful countries. It is part of the randomness of human nature.

That's your opinion (and one I share FWIW) but the Press and politicians treat children as somewhat more important - possibly due to the biological urge to protect ones young common to all animals.

Perhaps, more likely, it is because children are truly innocent and have their whole lives ahead of them and rely upon us as adults to protect them. But no they aren't worthy of any special treatment at all. :roll:

I don't think it is very helpful to have postmortem threads when bad things happen. It is all very well saying someone is "scum" but what good does it do? Until we program all human being at birth, we need to accept these events as part of life. We only really talk about the major incidents involving a lot of people but there are incidents with fewer people involved which are nevertheless as tragic for the people concerned. Bad things happen to good people on a minute by minute basis.

There is no point to these threads other than to show empathy for and solidarity with the people caught up in such horrible matters. I will leave it there as I think your views on life are odd and I don't want to get into trouble for daring to question them.

 

[radamfi]

I will leave it there as I think your views on life are odd and I don't want to get into trouble for daring to question them.

So why write this sentence? You have just got in a little punch below the belt while pretending to play fair.

The point is that in any point in time, a vast number of people collectively encounter a vast amount of suffering. Just because they experience the pain in smaller and discrete groups, they don't get recognition.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Has there been any comment from the National Rifle Association of America?

 

[Harbornite]

Has there been any comment from the National Rifle Association of America?

The closest thing the NRA has made to a comment on the matter was by tweeting about saving bullets. Very classy.

https://twitter.com/NRAblog/status/741955857982885888

http://www.vocativ.com/328559/hours-after-gunman-kills-50-nra-tweets-about-saving-money-on-bullets

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Agreed; I think it much more likely it was just because he was a closed minded bigoted ****. Completely senseless waste of 50 lives.

When I heard the latest update to this, I was indeed reminded to look back to July 2011 when the Norwegian mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik slaughtered 77 people in a planned cold blooded attack on those who he regarded as not following his "reasoning"

 

[zuriblue]

It seems there's a bit of it about. A man was arrested in Santa Monica with several rifles, high capacity magazines and a potential bomb making kit. He was allegedly heading to the local Gay Pride parade.

http://ktla.com/2016/06/12/man-with...-he-was-going-to-l-a-gay-pride-parade-report/

 

[DarloRich]

So why write this sentence? You have just got in a little punch below the belt while pretending to play fair.

Because I don't want to derail the thread and send us off into a discussion of your views but do want to counter your position that I (and if i may say most) feel is odd.

The point is that in any point in time, a vast number of people collectively encounter a vast amount of suffering. Just because they experience the pain in smaller and discrete groups, they don't get recognition.

Indeed - but the point about the situation under discussion here is that it was sudden,shocking & brutal trauma brought about by what is surely a deranged individual armed with a machine gun.

 

[Johnuk123]

Watching Americans singing "We will overcome" this morning for the umpteen time after yet another gun outrage made me think they just don't get it do they.

 

[DarloRich]

Watching Americans singing "We will overcome" this morning for the umpteen time after yet another gun outrage made me think they just don't get it do they.

I bet there will be lots of prayers but no action and a load of red neck brain donors carping on about the second amendment.

 

[Johnuk123]

I bet there will be lots of prayers but no action and a load of red neck brain donors carping on about the second amendment.

There will be, singing a few songs and lighting a few candles ain't going to cut it I'm afraid.
There will be another one along shortly, they know that as a fact.

 

[ainsworth74]

I believe that is something to do with them not having a standing army.

Eh? Switzerland's armed forces have nearly 150,000 active personnel the majority of which will in the army. As far as I'm aware the reason for those who do military service keeping their assault rifles at home is to enable them to rapidly become a guerrilla force if they are overrun in a surprise attack before they can meet up with their army formation.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It's quite touching how the BNP and Britain First have suddenly discovered their love of gay rights now that someone identifying as Muslim has killed gay people.

It's a real shame they weren't quite so interested back in 1999 when David Copeland, a neo-Nazi member of the BNP, nailbombed a pub in Soho and killed three people and an unborn baby. When asked why he he said he believed in the master race and wanted everyone else out of the country.

 

[zuriblue]

It looks like the gunman had some pretty serious mental health issues.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ex-wife-says-he-beat-her-and-held-her-hostage

Omar Mateen’s former wife says the man responsible for America’s deadliest ever mass shooting was physically abusive towards her, had mental health issues and was “obviously disturbed, deeply, and traumatised”.

Sitora Yusifiy was married to Mateen for four months in 2009 until her family was forced to “literally rescue me” after he kept her “hostage”, she said on Sunday in Colorado.

“In the beginning he was a normal being that cared about family, loved to joke, loved to have fun,” Yusifiy said of Mateen, whom she had met online.

“A few months after we were married I saw his instability, I saw his bipolar, and he would get mad out of nowhere, and that’s when I started worrying about my safety.

It really does beggar belief that this character was known to the FBI but was still able to buy firearms.

 

[Harbornite]

It's quite touching how the BNP and Britain First have suddenly discovered their love of gay rights now that someone identifying as Muslim has killed gay people.

It's a real shame they weren't quite so interested back in 1999 when David Copeland, a neo-Nazi member of the BNP, nailbombed a pub in Soho and killed three people and an unborn baby. When asked why he he said he believed in the master race and wanted everyone else out of the country.

I wasn't aware of that incident, having done a quick google search, I learnt that he was a paranoid schizophrenic. Somehow I don't think his beloved Nazis would have valued Mr Copeland's life due to his mental state.

 

[Mojo]

Can anyone explain what exactly upset Owen Jones so much on Sky News last night? I saw it was trending on Twitter and watched the clip on YouTube twice and I still can't see what caused him to throw such a tantrum.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Can anyone explain what exactly upset Owen Jones so much on Sky News last night?

Julia Hartley-Brewer- an own-brand Katie Hopkins- and the anchor were both desperately trying to downplay the homophobic nature of the attack and big up the Islamic aspect to the attack. Both of them specifically told Jones- who is gay- that he was wrong for calling it a homophobic attack.

It suits the right-wing agenda to downplay the homophobia, given the rampant homophobia in the far right, and built up the anti-Islamic sentiment. And Hartley-Brewer is a self-styled poster girl for the "libertarian" right.

ETA: Peter Tatchell explains it better than I: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/owen-jones-right-sky-news-8178356

 

[Mojo]

Julia Hartley-Brewer- an own-brand Katie Hopkins- and the anchor were both desperately trying to downplay the homophobic nature of the attack and big up the Islamic aspect to the attack. Both of them specifically told Jones- who is gay- that he was wrong for calling it a homophobic attack.

Can you advise me at what point did this happen? I have watched part of the video now a third time and cannot see it. Nor do I understand what exactly caused him to walk off at the end.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Can you advise me at what point did this happen? I have watched part of the video now a third time and cannot see it.

Both the anchor and Hartley-Brewer repeatedly attempt to correct him when he called it homophobic. The anchor repeatedly said it was "an attack on all humans" and Hartley-Brewer tried to make it all about her, saying ISIS hate her as much as they hate gay people.

Pathetic. But that's Sky News for you.

 

[shyanthony]

Both the anchor and Hartley-Brewer repeatedly attempt to correct him when he called it homophobic. The anchor repeatedly said it was "an attack on all humans" and Hartley-Brewer tried to make it all about her, saying ISIS hate her as much as they hate gay people.

Pathetic. But that's Sky News for you.

As a young gay male, the portrayal by the media outlets denying that it was a homophobic attack is disgusting.

Yet again they are scaremongering people into islamophobia just because the guy is Muslim.
Can't people yet see that this propaganda is never going to help

Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk

 

[Bletchleyite]

As a young gay male, the portrayal by the media outlets denying that it was a homophobic attack is disgusting.

Whether it was a homophobic attack or not depends on what was in the minds of the attackers. There is a good chance it was, but it may not have been - it may simply have been an attack on Western hedonism or any one of a number of things.

An attack on people who happen to be gay is not a homophobic attack in and of itself. It depends on whether the motivation for the attack was that. Similarly, an attack that happens to affect people of mainly one race is not necessarily a racist attack - it is only a racist attack if that was part of the motive.

It is all about intent, and I think he was wrong to throw his toys out of his pram in the way he did - it made him look very stupid. Instead he should have stayed and continued a rational discussion, or indeed published something about it afterwards if he felt so strongly.

 

[shyanthony]

Whether it was a homophobic attack or not depends on what was in the minds of the attackers. There is a good chance it was, but it may not have been - it may simply have been an attack on Western hedonism or any one of a number of things.

An attack on people who happen to be gay is not a homophobic attack in and of itself. It depends on whether the motivation for the attack was that. Similarly, an attack that happens to affect people of mainly one race is not necessarily a racist attack - it is only a racist attack if that was part of the motive.

It is all about intent, and I think he was wrong to throw his toys out of his pram in the way he did - it made him look very stupid. Instead he should have stayed and continued a rational discussion, or indeed published something about it afterwards if he felt so strongly.

If you pre-meditate anything, your intentions are to affect a certain group of people.

If he walked into a synagogue it would be antisemitic.
If he walked into a mosque it would be islamophobic.

So why isn't this being accepted for what it is:
an anti-LGBT attack...

If it was purely aimed at the west he would have done it anywhere...

Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk

 

[NSEFAN]

An attack on people who happen to be gay is not a homophobic attack in and of itself. It depends on whether the motivation for the attack was that. Similarly, an attack that happens to affect people of mainly one race is not necessarily a racist attack - it is only a racist attack if that was part of the motive.

Quite, just as the fact the murderer is a Muslim doesn't make it an islamic terrorist attack. The chap might well just be a complete and utter nutcase with far too easy access to offensive weapons. I've already had the obligatory Donald Trump message appear on my Facebook feed, insisting that the motivation was Islamic. :roll:

If it was purely aimed at the west he would have done it anywhere...

Any kind of enclosed space with lots of people is a suitable target for such an attack. Perhaps the location is close by to him? We can guess that he probably is a homophobic bigot, but we don't know.

 

[miami]

Quite, just as the fact the murderer is a Muslim doesn't make it an islamic terrorist attack. The chap might well just be a complete and utter nutcase with far too easy access to offensive weapons. I've already had the obligatory Donald Trump message appear on my Facebook feed, insisting that the motivation was Islamic. :roll:

Leave.EU are on the bandwagon too, see attached

Any kind of enclosed space with lots of people is a suitable target for such an attack. Perhaps the location is close by to him? We can guess that he probably is a homophobic bigot, but we don't know.

I didn't know him. You didn't. This chap did.

His father told NBC News his son was enraged after recently seeing a same-sex couple kissing in front of his family, an event that could have set him off.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If it was purely aimed at the west he would have done it anywhere...

Nightclubs are much more "blurred" as a concept than any of the religious examples you gave, certainly in 2016. There is for instance in MK an LGBT nightclub where on a Saturday most customers are not gay (on most other nights they are).

Therefore, it may simply have been an attack on a nightclub. The selection of victim may have been "hedonistic, alcohol-consuming Westerners", a group known not to be popular with extremist Islamism.

I can see the presenters' line of thought - any violent attack on anyone for any reason is a really bad thing. There isn't so much of a need to compartmentalise it unless people want to be victims to further a specific agenda. It would have been no more acceptable and no less acceptable had it occurred in a nightclub primarily frequented by straight people.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Quite, just as the fact the murderer is a Muslim doesn't make it an islamic terrorist attack.

Indeed so. From my knowledge of the US, my first conclusion was "another nutter with another far-too-easy-to-obtain gun".
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
If paulweaver is correct about quotes from the gunman's father, it may well have been a homophobic attack. However, did the Sky News presenters know that piece of information at the time? If not, they can surely be forgiven for not assuming targeting of the attack.

FWIW, even if they were wrong, the interviewee having walked out was just downright childish and did nothing other than make him look stupid. If you've agreed to be interviewed on TV, you need to know you'll have things thrown at you (in a verbal sense) and to counter them with rational argument.

 

[NSEFAN]

Indeed so. From my knowledge of the US, my first conclusion was "another nutter with another far-too-easy-to-obtain gun".

That was mine too, to be honest. The quote from the chap's father has given me good reason to believe that it was indeed a homophobic attack.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That was mine too, to be honest. The quote from the chap's father has given me good reason to believe that it was indeed a homophobic attack.

I would agree - the relevant question now is as to whether the Sky News presenters were aware of that or not, and similarly whether the interviewee was or not.

 

[Harbornite]

Whether it was a homophobic attack or not depends on what was in the minds of the attackers. There is a good chance it was, but it may not have been - it may simply have been an attack on Western hedonism or any one of a number of things.

An attack on people who happen to be gay is not a homophobic attack in and of itself. It depends on whether the motivation for the attack was that. Similarly, an attack that happens to affect people of mainly one race is not necessarily a racist attack - it is only a racist attack if that was part of the motive.

It is all about intent, and I think he was wrong to throw his toys out of his pram in the way he did - it made him look very stupid. Instead he should have stayed and continued a rational discussion, or indeed published something about it afterwards if he felt so strongly.

The killer had shown a negative attitude towards homosexuals before, so you can assume this venue was chosen for the specific reason that it was an LBGT club. His father's attitude towards gays is pretty despicable so it's no surprise that his son disliked homosexuals.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Leave.EU are on the bandwagon too, see attached

That's a bit insensitive of the Leave camp, and there are a quite a few reasons why it's a stupid justification for brexit.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Nightclubs are much more "blurred" as a concept than any of the religious examples you gave, certainly in 2016. There is for instance in MK an LGBT nightclub where on a Saturday most customers are not gay (on most other nights they are).

Nonsense, complete nonsense.

Whether the customers are gay, bi, or just prefer being in nightclubs that attract the LGBT community is irrelevant. The nightclub is presenting itself as a LGBT-friendly business and, as such, an attack on it is based on that. David Copeland killed three people with his nail bomb at the Admiral Duncan, none of whom were gay (one was a pregnant woman) but his stated aim was to "get rid of the gays" and he chose the Admiral Duncan because it was a gay-friendly pub in Soho.

Having watched the clip, I'd say Jones was trying to be rational but was repeatedly shouted down by Hartley-Brewer, a woman who is (if her Twitter feed is anything to go by) someone who clearly wishes she had the charm and intellect of Katie Hopkins.

ETA: I don't often have a lot of time for Owen Jones (indeed I've been blocked on Twitter by him for disagreeing with him about the competence of Ed Miliband) but actually, in this instance, I think he is right.

 

[shyanthony]

Nonsense, complete nonsense.

Whether the customers are gay, bi, or just prefer being in nightclubs that attract the LGBT community is irrelevant. The nightclub is presenting itself as a LGBT-friendly business and, as such, an attack on it is based on that. David Copeland killed three people with his nail bomb at the Admiral Duncan, none of whom were gay (one was a pregnant straight woman) but his stated aim was to "get rid of the gays" and he chose the Admiral Duncan because it was a gay-friendly pub in Soho.

Having watched the clip, I'd say Jones was trying to be rational but was repeatedly shouted down by Hartley-Brewer, a woman who is (if her Twitter feed is anything to go by) someone who clearly wishes she had the charm and intellect of Katie Hopkins.

Thankyou.

Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk