So, apparently Disney notified the FBI in April that this killer might have been scouting Disney and his wife (here's a law abiding Muslim for ya all) knew all about his plans to attack.
I wonder. Cameras everywhere. Plenty of places to stash equipment. Lots of plainclothes and costumed personnel. Intricate tunnel and back alley system. I'll bet they gave the FBI composite videos of the entire visit, just wonder how they were able to focus so easily.
Interesting point. I just think of all those poor slobs standing in line for miles like overweight sitting ducks.
Narrowing the issue down to only worship is dishonest. Liberals want to control people's lives, just other aspects of it. So, no, there is a clear liberal/conservative argument when the liberals arguments reveal obvious hypocrisies.
Disney's security sets the standard. The Mouse is a juggernaut and any bad press disrupts the cash flow so they go out of their way to make sure nothing goes wrong and anything that does gets swept up real quick. I've heard rumors they can have a full swat to any point of the park in under 2 minutes. I was just there last summer and made a point to look out for cameras and they are literally everywhere. At any given moment you are being recorded from at least 2 angles.
I've had a woman doctor for years. Big fan. Only mine has aged less gracefully. Don't get me wrong - I still mildly enjoy her being the privileged to doodle a smiley face on my prostate, but now I have to close my eyes and recall when our relationship was new and really special. On that other thing - I really don't think there's miles of daylight between us. At least on the mechanics of it all. Maybe it's just that I'd be a little more aggressive with profiling. This dude fell through the cracks. Apparently. As did the guy and that pile of rags he called a wife out in San Bernadino. As did Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood. We didn't need to invade a mosque to see that these few practitioners of Islam had a streak of zealotry behind them. My point is that fear of offending your hottie doctor causes all the wrong law enforcement people to go out of their way to NOT call them what they are. The shooty, explodey Muslims hide right there in plain sight while we're trying hard not to offend.
The solutions are there if we are interested in appeasing . After the charleston shooting, we took down flags , banned tv shows, sales of certain symbolic items. No body really cared that there are 2 sides to the confederate flag , and more to it than slavery. There are arrests made of people who may have known the kids plan. Why can't we do that in the Muslim community and make them welcomed, but scared to death to harbor criminals with a code of silence? Many double standards going on in this country right now.
"Military type" is an invented term, as is "assault weapon" by those with misplaced policy intentions, who don't the foggiest idea what they're talking about. It used to be that the Uzi was the demonic firearm of leftist choice. Then it was the AK-47. Today it's the AR-15. Tomorrow it will be the Sig Sauer MCX. Illustrating the point is the number of stories in the media identifying this dude's weapon as an AR-15. It wasn't. But it was a big, scary gun and after that, what's the diff. The diff is - which is to say, the important thing is - what it does. That's a more reasonable discussion when it comes to regulating guns. If we could restrict AR-15 magazine sales to only 10 rounds, I'd have no issue at all. Matter of fact, if the NRA could be somehow convinced that this wasn't just a foot in the door to bigger-better regs of other less scary firearms, I doubt they'd squawk. But, since those trying to outlaw these things don't have a fucking clue about what it is they're regulating and don't care, it's not an honest discussion. ETA: Further illustrating the point. . . LINK This morning, all the headlines were about how the AR-15 was the "mass shooter's weapon of choice." Everything changed this afternoon when someone pointed out the error. The new headline: The Gun the Orlando Shooter Use Wasn't an AR-15. That Doesn't Change Much. Might even be true, by the way, but it's mildly amusing how little being accurate mattered earlier today, and how saying "pardon the factual error" isn't likely. Big scary guns with strange names. Eh. Whatever.
Makes no difference to me, and shouldn't to law enforcement. If he called himself a Teamster, all this would be just a little more surprising. Doesn't matter one whit whether he was a true believer or just a guy who got the willies around gay guys. He was well worth profiling. If his dad were 20 years younger, I'd say the same about him. At his age, he doesn't fit the profile.
This right here is a huge part of the issue. Fully automatic weapons and large capacity magazines are the issue here not the "style' of the gun but many (not all) anti-gun* will take the time to learn the distinction. The biggest problem in society, i believe, is that people refuse to have real conversations that are constructive and mutual. both sides on so many issues are entrenched and are way too quick to resort to yelling and name calling. *i don't like the term anti-gun because i believe someone can be pro gun and still want a reasonable system of checks and balances before accessing firearms. This type of with us or against us term falls right into the yelling and name calling category.
It's more than being offended, Jack. She's a woman from Pakistan, she knows from offensive. It's materially restricting her rights because of who she is, not because of anything she's done. If that's the Muslim baby that needs to go out with the jihadi bath water than so be it. I'm just surprised someone that's so invested in the idea that the government can't properly manage a grade school cafeteria would blithely suggest that this great big Muslim profiling program is likely to be super effective.
You can still fly a confederate flag anywhere you want to on your own private property. People may snicker at you and subject you to much deserved ridicule but that's the price you pay for being firm in your convictions. But the flag is not banned. If this guy was a regular communicant at some mosque somewhere, then, yes I agree those folks owe us an explanation.
Funny thing about being snickered at flying that flag..:: I live in South Carolina and have for nearly ten years. There were nearly as many black southerners upset at the removal from the state house as there were anyone else. The people in the streets of Columbia making the rest of the country think everyone was against it, were mostly activists from northern cities. Main stream media painted a very different picture from reality as they often do. I don't have or fly that flag, it's of no consequence to me. But the decisions in that situation were not made by the people of this state , they were made my leftists from elsewhere
His ex wife should be arrested to start with. That's the same as arresting friends of the moron in charleston
Leftists from elsewhere? Don't you toothless hicks vote yourselves? I think you're nursing too many petty grievances, buddy. If there was a popular groundswell of support for keeping the flag on the statehouse, those of you for whom that was really important needed to do a much better job of making your representatives listen to you. Leftists from elsewhere aren't good for a lot of votes on Election Day.
The influence to take it down came federally. The activists in streets that were said to be locals were black lives matter and black panthers from elsewhere. And the kkk members were from North Carolina. The same activists spewing hate that were chased out of charleston by the black community that refused to buy into their bullshit. The same ones who were probably responsible (I think the found out one of them were) for setting churches on fire around the same time to make it look like it was the kkk
The influence to take it down came federally. The activists in streets that were said to be locals were black lives matter and black panthers from elsewhere. And the kkk members were from North Carolina. The same activists spewing hate that were chased out of charleston by the black community that refused to buy into their bullshit. The same ones who were probably responsible (I think the found out one of them were) for setting churches on fire around the same time to make it look like it was the kkk
I agree with all of that, but I do think the term "anti-gun" works for a huge chunk of that side of the debate. People who care little about what they're regulating as long as the net result is few guns for everyone. Not just fewer guns for bad people likely to shoot up a school. I suspect 75-80% of those advocating for more "gun control" would jump at the chance at a full confiscation policy. Which is why Australia is everyone's favorite example of good gun control.
It wasn't important to me.... I'm a ny transplant. Only thing I relate it to is the Dukes of hazard .
