Mass Shooting in San Antonio

[Gestalt]

Do you see the humerous futility of debating the topic with guys that equated cars and guns?

[Feruk]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It’s interesting, when there is a terrorist attack you’re not allowed to suggest that muslims or immigrants should face more surveillance or stricter conditions when entering the country. Lawmakers will line up to chant “not all muslims” or “immigration is our strength “ in front of the cameras.

Wasn't this attack a terrorist attack? Or the one in Vegas? Not sure your suggestions of more surveillance or entry restrictions for muslims would've done much here... Or are you implying that because the shooters in question were not muslim, these aren't terrorist attacks?

The reason the suggestion that stricter border controls should be implemented is unfavorable is because it doesn't account for the fact that most terrorists were born in the country where they commit the attack. Super ineffective is an understatement. As for more surveillance, it's hard to judge what an increase means considering we don't know how much surveillance is actually being done.

[rx7boi]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Do you see the humerous futility of debating the topic with guys that equated cars and guns?

Yes, quite.

[95EagleAWD]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The guy sounded like a lunatic, however there appears to be two inconvenient themes at play here for the left. One being that a good guy with a gun was able to stop a bad guy with a gun, the other being that he was a very outspoken angry atheist which probably contributed to his targeting of a church.

The good guy stopped what? 27 people died. That's a win?

[Kloubek]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Wasn't this attack a terrorist attack? Or the one in Vegas?

I guess that depends on your definition of terrorist.

Personally, I define a terrorist as someone who becomes an extremist and follows a group or their ideology as opposed to acting on their own. This is why I feel that most true "terrorist" acts are performed by individuals either from out of the country, or with affiliation or at least alignment with an outside group. I suppose my own definition would also apply to those, say, following KKK ideology or something similar.

However, by my definition, neither the Las Vegas nor this shooting would be considered a terrorist act. In my opinion, these are simply misguided or psychotic individuals who's only desire is to cause as much mayhem and death as possible. I believe it to be driven by mental illness or personality disorders moreso than actual terrorist ideology.

Tightening border control only reduces the risk from that outside element, but as you say - it does nothing for those who born in the country. Nor does it help those who decide to do something "in the name of", or decides to cause mass casualties just for the sake of doing it. However, it DOES reduce some level of risk so I'm all for properly vetting those entering the country... be it the US or Canada. The idea is to reduce risk as much as you can.

As far as these crackers committing mass murder - that's an issue in itself. One could argue gun control would be a good start or perhaps better medical support for those with mental illness. Unfortunately, there is no one-size-fits-all approach that would work and at the end of the day, you can never eliminate the potential of people flying off the handle at any time. I do think the US would be well served assessing the differences between their country and others where mass murder is extremely rare, and seeing of they cannot model their society and systems to closer mimic those less violent countries.

[Gestalt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The good guy stopped what? 27 people died. That's a win?

Didn't stop anything. He chased him down after he had already left the church and was driving away