Orlando, Florida mass shooting. 50 dead, 53 wounded

[Brinolovania]

Completely erroneous and without regard for demographics. If you want to go ahead and make political statements then okay, but it's hilarious that the same people saying "HOW MANY MORE LIVES" will then instantly backtrack and justify the cult that wants to kill all the gays, women who aren't covered from head to toe, and general infidels. So long as you do the deaths will keep on rolling in. What are the alternatives? Ban gay clubs for being Islamophobic? Gun control is reasonable, but they purchased their weapons legally and restrictions certainly didn't seem to stop them in Paris(not to mention the homemade bombs and knives alone used to carry out the Boston Bombing).

 

Most refugees, obviously, are not members of ISIS. This hasn't negated the fact that they've sent sexual assault and crime rates skyrocketing in their areas and that their culture is in direct opposition to modern ideals of the West(not killing those you disagree with being the primary one). If you want to mourn and then say that people need to take action, immediately eliminating the option to take action against the root cause is incredibly nonproductive.

From some quick Googling, it looks like ~70% of school shooters are white males, so it's not false, but it probably wasn't the best example. Regardless, the point I'm making is only that the group "mass murderers" is not a representative sample of a population. I'm not, as you say, "justifying the cult." The cult is ISIS, not Islam. The problem is, as it always is, the ones who take an idea too far and go crazy. I can tell you I sure as hell don't believe "killing people you disagree with" is a part of Muslim culture overall. It's obviously going to seem like that when we hear about terrorist attacks and stuff, but it's not like the news is gonna report "Muslim guy doesn't kill anyone." The subset of Muslims we see are the subset that are extreme, which is far from the whole. As for them increasing crime rates, I don't specifically know the numbers (if there are any). However, it should be noted that a large number of refugees have been coming in, and a large increase in population will ALWAYS come with a proportional increase in crime. And given that every time a Muslim commits a crime people flip out about it, I wouldn't be at all the surprised if the crime increase has been greatly exaggerated. That said, I am willing to say I'd want to see (reliable) stats before coming to a conclusion. My initial guess, though, is that it's not the huge deal it's made out to be.

 

I guess I didn't make it clear enough in my post, but my initial point about needing to make change was directed as mass shootings in general, not ISIS specifically. By that, yes, I do mean gun control. Say what you want about it being useless, making powerful (that is to say, fast-firing) weapons harder to obtain would reduce the rates of shootings like this. I don't think it would make everything perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than the nothing we're doing now. 

[vla1ne]

uh...not the best time to put it out there, but killing/enslaving people who disagree with you (so long as they were in a different religion) was pretty much the golden rule of all abrahamic religions. yes, it is radical, but it is also a core tenet of the unfiltered religions. just saying. it's extreme by today's standards, but that just shows how much we've progressed from religious rulings. nowadays when people actually follow the rules of religion to a T, it's considered a tragic massacre except by the westboro baptist church, but they're advocates of original bible rulings, so yeah.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

From some quick Googling, it looks like ~70% of school shooters are white males, so it's not false, but it probably wasn't the best example. Regardless, the point I'm making is only that the group "mass murderers" is not a representative sample of a population. I'm not, as you say, "justifying the cult." The cult is ISIS, not Islam. The problem is, as it always is, the ones who take an idea too far and go crazy. I can tell you I sure as hell don't believe "killing people you disagree with" is a part of Muslim culture overall. It's obviously going to seem like that when we hear about terrorist attacks and stuff, but it's not like the news is gonna report "Muslim guy doesn't kill anyone." The subset of Muslims we see are the subset that are extreme, which is far from the whole. As for them increasing crime rates, I don't specifically know the numbers (if there are any). However, it should be noted that a large number of refugees have been coming in, and a large increase in population will ALWAYS come with a proportional increase in crime. And given that every time a Muslim commits a crime people flip out about it, I wouldn't be at all the surprised if the crime increase has been greatly exaggerated. That said, I am willing to say I'd want to see (reliable) stats before coming to a conclusion. My initial guess, though, is that it's not the huge deal it's made out to be.

 

I guess I didn't make it clear enough in my post, but my initial point about needing to make change was directed as mass shootings in general, not ISIS specifically. By that, yes, I do mean gun control. Say what you want about it being useless, making powerful (that is to say, fast-firing) weapons harder to obtain would reduce the rates of shootings like this. I don't think it would make everything perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than the nothing we're doing now. 

I'll drop the lead-in argument since it's rather irrelevant, then. In the Western world if they're in a minority then radicalists are an incredibly small amount of muslims. This is because religions can obviously be followed in many ways and there's a more lenient approach practiced. In the Middle East itself however, where Sharia has been implemented, these kind of acts are common. A notable amount of immigrants who come from the Middle East share completely different ideals from the average Western muslim. Sharia and the ideals of ISIS are widely supported, which is what led to the spikes in rapes in the first place. Attractive western women are not covering up, so they are actually within their rights to rape, assault, etc. Most of the information was covered up or legally punishable to spread at some points in Germany, but you can do some digging into sexual assaults in places like Sweden if you want to read up. There's just this fundamental lack of understanding for some reason that a person will magically adjust their culture once they've crossed an arbitrary border when they won't. They literally see a gay club as a den of the devil and that its occupants must be "mercifully killed" as an islamic speaker at Orlando put it back in April. 

I'm no gun nut. Restrictions and bans are fine by me, but this upswing in terrorist attacks isn't actually going to be notably mitigated until people can deal with the elephant in the room.

[Aerion Brightflame]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36513468

 

Additional information on the perp - His former wife (A woman with no reason to lie in his favour) claims he was suffering from bi-polar disorder, and that the attack was thus due to mental illness rather than outright radicalism. 

 

His father has a television show that expressed anti-Pakistani views and show sympathy for the Afghan Taliban. Which casts some of what he said prior into doubt. 

 

The guy also had a fixation with the NYPD - Which is kinda weird. 

 

Additionally - In the alleged call which makes up most of the evidence for it being Islamic Extremism, he expressed some kind of reference to the Boston Bombers. Take what you will.

 

 

On a slightly less sensitve note: This seems like it is far too coincidental from an anti-gun viewpoint. This is either a radical or a sufferer of mental illness, who managed to legally obtain multiple firearms (Including an Assault Rifle), and used them to commit an act of mass violence. Non police officers attempted to stop the man as he began with there own guns and failed, and the situation wasn't resolved until dedicated officers with training for the situation were brought in to resolve it. 

 

Just the amount of coincidence in the chain of events is shocking. 

[Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-36513468

 

Additional information on the perp - His former wife (A woman with no reason to lie in his favour) claims he was suffering from bi-polar disorder, and that the attack was thus due to mental illness rather than outright radicalism.

 

His father has a television show that expressed anti-Pakistani views and show sympathy for the Afghan Taliban. Which casts some of what he said prior into doubt.

 

The guy also had a fixation with the NYPD - Which is kinda weird.

 

Additionally - In the alleged call which makes up most of the evidence for it being Islamic Extremism, he expressed some kind of reference to the Boston Bombers. Take what you will.

 

 

On a slightly less sensitve note: This seems like it is far too coincidental from an anti-gun viewpoint. This is either a radical or a sufferer of mental illness, who managed to legally obtain multiple firearms (Including an Assault Rifle), and used them to commit an act of mass violence. Non police officers attempted to stop the man as he began with there own guns and failed, and the situation wasn't resolved until dedicated officers with training for the situation were brought in to resolve it.

 

Just the amount of coincidence in the chain of events is shocking.

For the record, the "armed hero" myth is already a load of bullshit. It really feels like yet another way to get people to buy guns. If the suspect has, say, an AR-15 or AK-47, and all you have is a handgun, it ain't gonna do sheet.

 

In addition, while I don't agree with the general main focus of one side of the debate being assault weapons, this horrific incident feels like even more of a reason to make assault weapons tougher to get, which would hopefully spread out to other guns.

[Dwarven King]

He shouted praise to Alluh. Daesh or not, it's Islam related. The FBI questioned him multiple times before. 

 

Trump's words have proved prophetic unfortunately

 

I have no love for Islam, my ancestors bones will attest that, I had only wished that "progressive" people (including good Muslims) would see the cancer that Islam has become 

 

So, if he shouted "Praise Moradin!", you would be pushing for all copies of the Lord of the Rings to be burned, correct? Because that's essentially what you're saying. Just because he shouted that, doesn't mean he's part of ISIS. Like previously mentioned, he could have simply said that to get a reaction. Maybe he wanted fifteen minutes of world fame. Or maybe he was just mental. Who knows? All we do know is that he was born in America and has NO ties to ISIS.

 

Trust me, if there were ties, the FBI would find them.

[vla1ne]

what exactly is this armed hero myth anyways? wasn't he inside a "no guns" nightclub for the majority of this? where no civilian would have been packing a weapon? or did i miss some details in the case?

[Face McShooty]

26 of the lives lost names revealed... Ranged from 20 years old to 50

https://twitter.com/orlandopolice/status/742353614803460096

[Aerion Brightflame]

what exactly is this armed hero myth anyways? wasn't he inside a "no guns" nightclub for the majority of this? where no civilian would have been packing a weapon? or did i miss some details in the case?

 

The myth is that in previous mass shootings like this what was missing was some brave hero with a handgun putting an end to the guy early on. 

 

In this instance, there was some kind of armed individual (I believe a member of the nightclubs security) who had a handgun and had a brief shoot-out with the perp before being killed. Which is technically a dismissal of the whole idea of 'one brave individual with a handgun is what was needed'. 

[Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP]

The myth is that in previous mass shootings like this what was missing was some brave hero with a handgun putting an end to the guy early on. 

 

In this instance, there was some kind of armed individual (I believe a member of the nightclubs security) who had a handgun and had a brief shoot-out with the perp before being killed. Which is technically a dismissal of the whole idea of 'one brave individual with a handgun is what was needed'. 

 

I'm actually not sure if it's handguns or any gun for that matter. I assume handguns, because how many business owners want customers with assault rifles being openly carried in their place of business?

 

But yeah, pretty much. A handgun or even a shotgun ain't gonna do jack against an AR-15 or similar weapon. Even the police have had trouble with this in the past, such as this infamous incident from 1997 where the LAPD were completely outgunned to the point they had to get guns from a local gun shop. Amazingly, no one was killed in this incident minus the two suspects:

 

 

In this case, the suspects had AK-47s with armor piercing rounds (and other weapons) along with full body armor.

[vla1ne]

I thought the idea of concealed/open carry was multiple individuals? the security guards were likely the only armed people inside the club. wouldn't a myth like that be better debunked if the situation had been under the actual conditions provided by the 2nd amendment? i mean, when you go into a no gun zone, the target becomes the few people allowed guns, so the security guard doesn't really fit the myth, considering he's the first target regardless.

 

other than that though, who in their right mind thinks "one individual" would be enough in a case like this? maybe 4 or 5 with guns in the crowd, but considering it was likely that security would get hit first, no matter the situation, they aren't exactly good samples to draw from.

[Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP]

I thought the idea of concealed/open carry was multiple individuals? the security guards were likely the only armed people inside the club. wouldn't a myth like that be better debunked if the situation had been under the actual conditions provided by the 2nd amendment? i mean, when you go into a no gun zone, the target becomes the few people allowed guns, so the security guard doesn't really fit the myth, considering he's the first target regardless.

 

other than that though, who in their right mind thinks "one individual" would be enough in a case like this? maybe 4 or 5 with guns in the crowd, but considering it was likely that security would get hit first, no matter the situation, they aren't exactly good samples to draw from.

Even if you had 4 or 5 people with handguns, it's likely not gonna stop someone with a assault rifle/semi-automatic rifle. The firing capacity of guns like that are high. Unless all 4 or 5 of those people can pull the trigger really fast before the gunman can unload dozens of rounds, it won't end well.

 

I guess it could depend on location, though.

[vla1ne]

Even if you had 4 or 5 people with handguns, it's likely not gonna stop someone with a assault rifle/semi-automatic rifle. The firing capacity of guns like that are high. Unless all 4 or 5 of those people can pull the trigger really fast before the gunman can unload dozens of rounds, it won't end well.

 

I guess it could depend on location, though.

not saying they could stop him, but they'd have a better shot at it than the security guard from sheer surprise and nobody besides them knowing they were packing heat. just two shots would be enough to drop him, one if you can am at an arm or his head. but again, i'm not saying it'd be guaranteed to prevent what happened, but i am saying that this isn't the best sample if you're looking to point out an armed hero myth.

[Trebuchet MS]

what exactly is this armed hero myth anyways?

The assumption that because you have a gun, you can react to and defend yourself from an opposing shooter. That's often not the case unless you've received training to respond to such a threat. More often than not an average person would be seized by panic, fear, and the Bystander Syndrome before they can draw their gun, let alone hit the right person with it.

[Simping For Hina]

I can actually post for once. But funk this, man. I am an Orlando native and I have gone to Pulse before. I actually feel scared, shivering, about this whole event. I don't feel like writing more on the topic, but I wrote this and put this on Facebook and Skype.

 

"I have come across so many different point of views from the Orlando Shooting at Pulse. But the one thing I keep seeing more than anything else is care. It may be that I am right in Orlando, and everybody is checking on everybody, but this is more than just a mass shooting to people. For me, this is a personal attack as I have been to Pulse on numerous occasions and I have friends who spend their time down town and around the area. As of right now, I don't care why the shooting happened and I don't to. I just want to make sure that my friends, acquainted, and people I met only when I attended the clubs are okay. I hope for those who have been injured make for a healthy recovery. I feel for those who lost their lives. No one deserved for this to happen.

Thank you for my friends who checked on each other. Thank you for the knowledge being sent out about how we all can make this tragedy mean something. I can't express how distraught I am about this entire ordeal, a little shaken up, but all the help, hope, prayers are evident about how much people care. This brings a smile and some tears to my eyes through this travesty.

Also, thank you, Facebook, for having the "Safety Update" for my friends, to show that they are safe as well."

[vla1ne]

The assumption that because you have a gun, you can react to and defend yourself from an opposing shooter. That's often not the case unless you've received training to respond to such a threat. More often than not an average person would be seized by panic, fear, and the Bystander Syndrome before they can draw their gun, let alone hit the right person with it.

 

so it's the assumption that people who can react will react in the face of danger? sounds legit. i mean, yes, there's odds of others getting shot, but in cases like this, how many people aren't going to be shot otherwise? not to mention there were how many hours from the start to the resolution to this incident, bystander effect isn't exactly permanent, and from the tests I've seen, not one time have they actually put the full extent of the 2nd amendment to the test. knowing everybody else in the room might have a gun could be a very strong deterrent to pulling out a gun. i have yet to see a mass shooting where the bystander effect and the ability to conceal carry were in effect at the same time. if you have  something relating to those kinds of statistics, i ask that you link to it. actually, after typing that, i decided to look up concealed carry and public shootings, ran into a couple surprises: http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/15/opinion/la-oe-kopel-guns-resistance-nra-20130115and http://concealedcampus.org/common-arguments/

 

yeah, the hero myth isn't quite a myth, it's actually a thing. in areas with conceal carry, people starting shootings get shot quite often by bystanders before they can rack up numbers. on the other hand, i will have to say that according to the first article, and parts of the second stat page many of the people who are holding guns were more trained than the average citizen, but the point remains, concealed carry creates unexpected adversity. it acts as a deterrent to those with intelligence, and can facilitate the removal those without said intelligence. not saying they'll prevent tragedies, but minimal training with a pistol in a situation where there is one clear target, like this, has yet to be tested fully.

[Simping For Hina]

My worry is that people will retaliate.

When you devalue the sense of human life to a bunch of numbers, then you seemingly lose track of what being human means and what it means to you. Yes, there were 50+ people who were killed. Yes, there numbers should mean something. But if can't just take their death for less than something tragic. You have to use their death to mean something, and that doesn't mean let the number be information given. It means that each death is another tragedy, one step closer to change, but one step back from where we were before. Each person killed in the tragedy didn't die just to be a number, they didn't deserve to die and they didn't die for everyone to worry. We can use their death to come together, bring love to the world. Regardless of who did it or whatever, love and remembrance are what are going to bring people together and face the problems that occurred.

 

Yes, you funking disgust me. Because you're letting go of the fact that these people are people. Some people who I knew, some people who I met, and some people who I now never even get to meet. There is a difference when this shooting takes place in your backyard, yes. But death is not something that is a statistic. And a mass shooting like this isn't just another shooting down the road. Don't desensitize the people and don't desensitize the information to what might happen. Take it as what has happened, what we lost, and what could be gained from this.

 

If you look for the negative after something negative, your life will only spiral down. This entire thing is going to be used by different people in different ways, and right now, I am ignoring all of that because the populace can use this more effectively than those people. We can use this to better ourselves, better the community, and bring people together. Like Orlando is already doing.

 

Tonight, there is a candlelight vigil around Lake Eola, in the heart of downtown Orlando.

[Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP]

So, apparently, this guy tried to buy body armor, but the store refused to sell him the body armor.

[vla1ne]

So, apparently, this guy tried to buy body armor, but the store refused to sell him the body armor.

exactly how much was he planning on getting away with? from the sound of it, he was thinking about going at it as a one man army.

[Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP]

exactly how much was he planning on getting away with? from the sound of it, he was thinking about going at it as a one man army.

 

That what it seems like to me as well.

 

I'm also wondering if that arrest in California has any connection with this.

[a bad post]

I'm so tired. I feel so empty inside hearing this. Why is my existence controversial? Why should I have to live in fear, and be scared to go to places where I thought I could have a good time with people who are like me? You know we act like our society is so progressive, and forward thinking, but a man just shot up a gay nightclub because he was angry he saw two men kissing. Is this what we have to expect being a part of the LGBT community? Do we have to be careful how "gay" we act around others, because it will set some crazy person off to see us love each other.

 

A year ago we celebrated because gay marriage was legal. Now we're burying our brothers and sisters and worrying about who walks into what bathroom. Is that the fate of this community. Every victory we get we're set back by a hundred more defeats. I just want know what we did to deserve this? It's probably not a question any of you can answer, but I just want to know. Why does us being born the way we were offend people. Why do people want to murder us for who we are?

 

I don't really care what this man was. Member of ISIS or not this is a hate crime, and an act of domestic terrorism. 

[Delibirb]

I don't really care what this man was. Member of ISIS or not this is a hate crime, and an act of domestic terrorism. 

From what I can tell, the whole argument right now (aside from 2nd amendment bull) is whether this was a hate crime OR an act of terrorism. People don't seem to understand, it literally is both.

[Aerion Brightflame]

From what I can tell, the whole argument right now (aside from 2nd amendment bull) is whether this was a hate crime OR an act of terrorism. People don't seem to understand, it literally is both.

 

Technically the argument is whether or not it was due to an organised extremist group and was plotted as part of a larger scheme, or if it was just a plain old spontaneous hate crime/domestic terrorism. 

 

There is a distinction there

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I'm so tired. I feel so empty inside hearing this. Why is my existence controversial? Why should I have to live in fear, and be scared to go to places where I thought I could have a good time with people who are like me? You know we act like our society is so progressive, and forward thinking, but a man just shot up a gay nightclub because he was angry he saw two men kissing. Is this what we have to expect being a part of the LGBT community? Do we have to be careful how "gay" we act around others, because it will set some crazy person off to see us love each other.

 

A year ago we celebrated because gay marriage was legal. Now we're burying our brothers and sisters and worrying about who walks into what bathroom. Is that the fate of this community. Every victory we get we're set back by a hundred more defeats. I just want know what we did to deserve this? It's probably not a question any of you can answer, but I just want to know. Why does us being born the way we were offend people. Why do people want to murder us for who we are?

 

 

I mean there are limits. But it more common sense than "how gay" you are

 

Don't Twerk on the streets in BDSM outfits. I don't want to see that from gay people, and I also don't want to see that from Straight people. 

 

It's not what you did, (guess), but there are people in the LGB(T) community who do pull stunts like that and that turns off otherwise sympathetic people

 

There's a reason I don't identify with the movement even though I'm bisexual, and it's cause of people like the ones I described. 

 

That being said, this is murder, maybe for Daesh, but murder never the less

 

Edit: So are people really buying the parent's story now?

[Dad]

I'm so tired. I feel so empty inside hearing this. Why is my existence controversial? Why should I have to live in fear, and be scared to go to places where I thought I could have a good time with people who are like me? You know we act like our society is so progressive, and forward thinking, but a man just shot up a gay nightclub because he was angry he saw two men kissing. Is this what we have to expect being a part of the LGBT community? Do we have to be careful how "gay" we act around others, because it will set some crazy person off to see us love each other.

 

A year ago we celebrated because gay marriage was legal. Now we're burying our brothers and sisters and worrying about who walks into what bathroom. Is that the fate of this community. Every victory we get we're set back by a hundred more defeats. I just want know what we did to deserve this? It's probably not a question any of you can answer, but I just want to know. Why does us being born the way we were offend people. Why do people want to murder us for who we are?

 

I don't really care what this man was. Member of ISIS or not this is a hate crime, and an act of domestic terrorism. 

 

This is exactly how I felt when that jabroni shot up the church about a year ago.  Now replace gay and LGBT with black and I can tell you exactly why I know what you're going through.