Armed 'patriots' in US turn protests toward Muslim Americans

[arrowsdawdle]

Hate will be met with hate. This ain't no solution and will only exacerbate the problem.

You are right. Getting even isn't the answer. Getting ahead is.

[arrowsdawdle]

I know more than a few 60-70 year old Marines who can still put one in the middle of your forehead at 200 yards. I'm one of them.

Yeah and I know 73 year olds that can't tell the difference between a taser and a handgun.

But in your case we only have your word for it.

My guess is that you couldn't hit a cow's ar$e with a handful of rice at your age.

My guess is your guess is wrong.

I'm 78 and I could still make a head shot from 200 yards. Might miss the forehead by a couple

of inches but it still wouldn't matter to the recipient.

It ain't bragging if you can do it.

[Tywais]

Oversized image removed due to messing up page format.

[chuckd]

Publicus, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:00, said:

USA does not need these gunslingers assigning themselves their own chosen task of defending the homeland against the people who live in the homeland, i.e., Americans who are Muslim.

These rednecks are gun nuts who are cooking up any reason they can to pull the trigger. This is what these crackpots live for.

This tiny number of Americans believe that running around looking for people to shoot makes 'em patriots. They are idiots.

The homeland needs to be defended against rednecks with guns. Second Amendment is not a license to run around on the loose under a flag to kill people you want to be your enemy.

Something for you to think about.

For all your bluster, redneck gun nut slurs, who are not patriots merely idiots.

You have no idea how many potential attacks these people may have stopped by just being rednecks. Nor the FBI, Nor the CIA or whatever other alphabet soup America has.

You might want to tone down the rhetoric.

When you make an attack like this, you are expected to provide some measure of quantifiable justification. let me start off. I would suggest that zero attacks by terrorists have been prevented by gangs of nuts like the ones you are boosting.

You continue to issue instruction to posters as if you have some authority. Publicus is American. You are not. It is his homeland that is affected by this phenomenon, not yours. The CIA is prevented by law from operating on US soil. I really don't think you or these other rednecks have anything to offer America's security and intelligence agencies.

Is it OK with you if I wade in on this? I am an American, Texan and formerly lived in the city these young lads were protecting.

According to your exacting standards for posting entitlement, then that should make me imminently qualified to offer an

opinion on the subject.

Having said all that, terrorists nearly always look for soft targets. Soft targets would be identified as those targets that

don't have armed personnel around them to interfere with the terrorist's shooting spree.

Your comment that zero attacks have been thwarted is meaningless. How do you know there wasn't a plan to attack this

very same recruitment center where the armed civilians were in attendance but plans were changed by the terrorists when

they saw the armed personnel?

Your statement is speculative at best.

I understand you are not an American and my guess would b a European, Australian or a dual nationality even. Since you

are also not an American, please tell us exactly what you might have to offer America's security and intelligence agencies that

SgtRock might not possess..

My guess is the only contribution you could possibly make would be even more rhetoric than we have already been subjected to.

[Chicog]

Having said all that, terrorists nearly always look for soft targets. Soft targets would be identified as those targets that

don't have armed personnel around them to interfere with the terrorist's shooting spree.

Yeah, let's not forget suicide bombers, they don't really care how soft their targets are.

[Publicus]

Publicus, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:00, said:

USA does not need these gunslingers assigning themselves their own chosen task of defending the homeland against the people who live in the homeland, i.e., Americans who are Muslim.

These rednecks are gun nuts who are cooking up any reason they can to pull the trigger. This is what these crackpots live for.

This tiny number of Americans believe that running around looking for people to shoot makes 'em patriots. They are idiots.

The homeland needs to be defended against rednecks with guns. Second Amendment is not a license to run around on the loose under a flag to kill people you want to be your enemy.

Something for you to think about.

For all your bluster, redneck gun nut slurs, who are not patriots merely idiots.

You have no idea how many potential attacks these people may have stopped by just being rednecks. Nor the FBI, Nor the CIA or whatever other alphabet soup America has.

You might want to tone down the rhetoric.

When you make an attack like this, you are expected to provide some measure of quantifiable justification. let me start off. I would suggest that zero attacks by terrorists have been prevented by gangs of nuts like the ones you are boosting.

You continue to issue instruction to posters as if you have some authority. Publicus is American. You are not. It is his homeland that is affected by this phenomenon, not yours. The CIA is prevented by law from operating on US soil. I really don't think you or these other rednecks have anything to offer America's security and intelligence agencies.

Is it OK with you if I wade in on this? I am an American, Texan and formerly lived in the city these young lads were protecting.

According to your exacting standards for posting entitlement, then that should make me imminently qualified to offer an

opinion on the subject.

Having said all that, terrorists nearly always look for soft targets. Soft targets would be identified as those targets that

don't have armed personnel around them to interfere with the terrorist's shooting spree.

Your comment that zero attacks have been thwarted is meaningless. How do you know there wasn't a plan to attack this

very same recruitment center where the armed civilians were in attendance but plans were changed by the terrorists when

they saw the armed personnel?

Your statement is speculative at best.

I understand you are not an American and my guess would b a European, Australian or a dual nationality even. Since you

are also not an American, please tell us exactly what you might have to offer America's security and intelligence agencies that

SgtRock might not possess..

My guess is the only contribution you could possibly make would be even more rhetoric than we have already been subjected to.

According to your exacting standards for posting entitlement, then that should make me imminently qualified to offer an

opinion on the subject.

Same principle would apply in trying to judge the military capabilities of graduates of Harvard Law School or of Oxford, to reference a remark from another of your posts.

Harvard Law for example has 18 recipients of the Medal of Honor, to include Leonard Wood, Theodore Roosevent, Theodore Roosevelt Jr. Seven won the Medal during the Civil War in which Texas as a member state of the Confederacy was on the losing side.

Learn something new every day about Muslims too. Syrian refugees are not Daesh.

One also suspects that if armed special ops soldiers of several kind are being faced fearlessly by Daesh in the ME, a couple of armed rednecks or police officers standing around a recruiting center ain't gonna scare 'em off either. Stands to reason y'know.

Edited December 12, 2015 by Publicus

[simple1]

Out of curiosity are people such as those in the photo authorised to carry these types of weapons, presumably with munitions & 'stand guard' in a public place. Alternatively, in reality, was it just a permitted once off photo opportunity with law enforcement oversight.

Edited December 13, 2015 by simple1

[stevenl]

Publicus, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:00, said:

USA does not need these gunslingers assigning themselves their own chosen task of defending the homeland against the people who live in the homeland, i.e., Americans who are Muslim.

These rednecks are gun nuts who are cooking up any reason they can to pull the trigger. This is what these crackpots live for.

This tiny number of Americans believe that running around looking for people to shoot makes 'em patriots. They are idiots.

The homeland needs to be defended against rednecks with guns. Second Amendment is not a license to run around on the loose under a flag to kill people you want to be your enemy.

Something for you to think about.

For all your bluster, redneck gun nut slurs, who are not patriots merely idiots.

You have no idea how many potential attacks these people may have stopped by just being rednecks. Nor the FBI, Nor the CIA or whatever other alphabet soup America has.

You might want to tone down the rhetoric.

When you make an attack like this, you are expected to provide some measure of quantifiable justification. let me start off. I would suggest that zero attacks by terrorists have been prevented by gangs of nuts like the ones you are boosting.

You continue to issue instruction to posters as if you have some authority. Publicus is American. You are not. It is his homeland that is affected by this phenomenon, not yours. The CIA is prevented by law from operating on US soil. I really don't think you or these other rednecks have anything to offer America's security and intelligence agencies.

Is it OK with you if I wade in on this? I am an American, Texan and formerly lived in the city these young lads were protecting.

According to your exacting standards for posting entitlement, then that should make me imminently qualified to offer an

opinion on the subject.

Having said all that, terrorists nearly always look for soft targets. Soft targets would be identified as those targets that

don't have armed personnel around them to interfere with the terrorist's shooting spree.

Your comment that zero attacks have been thwarted is meaningless. How do you know there wasn't a plan to attack this

very same recruitment center where the armed civilians were in attendance but plans were changed by the terrorists when

they saw the armed personnel?

Your statement is speculative at best.

I understand you are not an American and my guess would b a European, Australian or a dual nationality even. Since you

are also not an American, please tell us exactly what you might have to offer America's security and intelligence agencies that

SgtRock might not possess..

My guess is the only contribution you could possibly make would be even more rhetoric than we have already been subjected to.

I admire your deductive skills. On a forum like this, not american so probably European, Australian or dual nationality. Wow.

What is an Englishman like sgtrock offering the American intelligence community BTW?

Edited December 13, 2015 by stevenl

[Boon Mee]

The legacy of Obama's failure to tackle Islamic terrorism and those preaching extremism. There may at present be only a small minority who explicitly threaten to use force, but the direction the wind is blowing is plain to see.

https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/12/09/most-americans-dislike-islam/

Yes, thank baby Jesus for these brave white guys tackling this imminent danger.

I probably should note here that since 9/11, 16 people have been killed by "Islamic Terrorism" making your chances of being killed twenty million to one. See, Islamic terrorism isn't a thing except in the minds of wingnuts.

Idiots. The TV teabaggers are going to love this.

Beside it is nonsense, it goes into the millions if you look outside your home town.

But if it would be true I am allowed to shoot you in the leg?.....should be OK with you, because the chance of being shot in the leg by me is just 1:8.000.000.000.

Some people write utter nonsense in TVF don't they.

Heh...got that right...

[FritsSikkink]

Bunch of idiots, what part of you shall not kill in thce bible didn't you understand.

[SgtRock]

lostboy, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:53, said:

SgtRock, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:22, said:

Publicus, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:00, said:Publicus, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:00, said:

USA does not need these gunslingers assigning themselves their own chosen task of defending the homeland against the people who live in the homeland, i.e., Americans who are Muslim.

These rednecks are gun nuts who are cooking up any reason they can to pull the trigger. This is what these crackpots live for.

This tiny number of Americans believe that running around looking for people to shoot makes 'em patriots. They are idiots.

The homeland needs to be defended against rednecks with guns. Second Amendment is not a license to run around on the loose under a flag to kill people you want to be your enemy.

Something for you to think about.

For all your bluster, redneck gun nut slurs, who are not patriots merely idiots.

You have no idea how many potential attacks these people may have stopped by just being rednecks. Nor the FBI, Nor the CIA or whatever other alphabet soup America has.

You might want to tone down the rhetoric.

When you make an attack like this, you are expected to provide some measure of quantifiable justification. let me start off. I would suggest that zero attacks by terrorists have been prevented by gangs of nuts like the ones you are boosting.

You continue to issue instruction to posters as if you have some authority. Publicus is American. You are not. It is his homeland that is affected by this phenomenon, not yours. The CIA is prevented by law from operating on US soil. I really don't think you or these other rednecks have anything to offer America's security and intelligence agencies.

And you can provide quantifiable justification ?

The clue was in the word '' Potential '' The unknown cannot be quantified.

Phrases such as '' I would suggest '' '' I really don't think '' along with your false and wrong assumptions shows you for what you really.

You have a good day now

[SgtRock]

Publicus, on 12 Dec 2015 - 23:31, said:

SgtRock, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:22, said:

Publicus, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:00, said:Publicus, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:00, said:

USA does not need these gunslingers assigning themselves their own chosen task of defending the homeland against the people who live in the homeland, i.e., Americans who are Muslim.

These rednecks are gun nuts who are cooking up any reason they can to pull the trigger. This is what these crackpots live for.

This tiny number of Americans believe that running around looking for people to shoot makes 'em patriots. They are idiots.

The homeland needs to be defended against rednecks with guns. Second Amendment is not a license to run around on the loose under a flag to kill people you want to be your enemy.

Something for you to think about.

For all your bluster, redneck gun nut slurs, who are not patriots merely idiots.

You have no idea how many potential attacks these people may have stopped by just being rednecks. Nor the FBI, Nor the CIA or whatever other alphabet soup America has.

You might want to tone down the rhetoric.

Quantify please thanks.

One cannot be expected to support vacant claims, ghostsbusters of the bad guys only they can see, nor can one support unknown or unknowable guessed at stuff The post refers to...well ..nothing. The post presents the unknowable that may perhaps be known only to and kept by rednecks. Rednecks running around with guns under their bushman beards.

Rednecks.

Trying to put forth the unknowable as a rationale is truly desperate not to mention vacuous.

Can't recall ever having seen anything like this.

You do understand the word '' Potential '' ?

You cannot quantify the unknown.

Security Services Worldwide are not in the habit of releasing details of '' Potential '' attacks until long after the event, and then usually during court proceedings during a trial, or they are actively seeking the perpetrators and are hoping for help from the General Public.

I am surprised that an individual, such as yourself is not even aware of the basics.

[SgtRock]

stevenl, on 13 Dec 2015 - 07:39, said:

chuckd, on 13 Dec 2015 - 01:05, said:

Is it OK with you if I wade in on this? I am an American, Texan and formerly lived in the city these young lads were protecting.

According to your exacting standards for posting entitlement, then that should make me imminently qualified to offer an

opinion on the subject.

Having said all that, terrorists nearly always look for soft targets. Soft targets would be identified as those targets that

don't have armed personnel around them to interfere with the terrorist's shooting spree.

Your comment that zero attacks have been thwarted is meaningless. How do you know there wasn't a plan to attack this

very same recruitment center where the armed civilians were in attendance but plans were changed by the terrorists when

they saw the armed personnel?

Your statement is speculative at best.

I understand you are not an American and my guess would b a European, Australian or a dual nationality even. Since you

are also not an American, please tell us exactly what you might have to offer America's security and intelligence agencies that

SgtRock might not possess..

My guess is the only contribution you could possibly make would be even more rhetoric than we have already been subjected to.

I admire your deductive skills. On a forum like this, not american so probably European, Australian or dual nationality. Wow.

What is an Englishman like sgtrock offering the American intelligence community BTW?

You sarcastically denounce someone's deductive skills and then call me an Englishman ?

[geriatrickid]

Check out the guy at the very back he is 70 plus , and they wonder why there are so many shootings..

If he is 70+ then he certainly has kept himself in shape.

These folks are not the reason why there are so many shootings. What I see are some unsophisticated folks, for sure. However, I also see men who understand the responsibilities of gun ownership and who are trained in the use of firearms and firearms safety. I'm not afraid of physically and mentally fit individuals like this. These are not the people who go on gun rampages. Sorry.

[SgtRock]

geriatrickid, on 13 Dec 2015 - 09:00, said:

shirtless, on 12 Dec 2015 - 12:51, said:

Check out the guy at the very back he is 70 plus , and they wonder why there are so many shootings..

If he is 70+ then he certainly has kept himself in shape.

These folks are not the reason why there are so many shootings. What I see are some unsophisticated folks, for sure. However, I also see men who understand the responsibilities of gun ownership and who are trained in the use of firearms and firearms safety. I'm not afraid of physically and mentally fit individuals like this. These are not the people who go on gun rampages. Sorry.

Well said.

[Pinot]

Check out the guy at the very back he is 70 plus , and they wonder why there are so many shootings..

what does that comment mean? he might be the best in the group......and might of actually done some good...already..(and on his own). How would you know? Perhaps you think older guys can't hit a target?

I know more than a few 60-70 year old Marines who can still put one in the middle of your forehead at 200 yards. I'm one of them.

Yeah and I know 73 year olds that can't tell the difference between a taser and a handgun.

But in your case we only have your word for it.

My guess is that you couldn't hit a cow's ar$e with a handful of rice at your age.

You see what you did? All the old wingnuts had to chime in that they can still hit a gnat's ass at 5 miles. Jeesh!

I can't even hit the bowl on a regular basis anymore and I'm younger than that old fart!

Remember the old Churchill line, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"? The loony right has changed that to, "The only thing to embrace is fear itself."

All these bigoted cowards with their big guns...pathetic

[LomSak27]

The legacy of Obama's failure to tackle Islamic terrorism and those preaching extremism. There may at present be only a small minority who explicitly threaten to use force, but the direction the wind is blowing is plain to see.

STEELY DAN keeps with the game plan. Blame everything on Obama. Now weren't these guys the very ones that would stand outside the halls and auditoriums where Obama was speaking a couple years back? With their WEAPONS. If that happened to say Jr Bush the police and secret service would have tackled them and hauled them off as an assassins, or liberal psycho Saddam kissers, but because its Obama it was ok

Methinks you better examine this in light of Dick Cheneys Iraq policy. I would have said Jr Bush but according to a recent book by his father, it was Big Dick Cheney who was the hands on guy. Creating the environment for ISIS to fester and grow. Thanks Dick, Thanks for everything. Gee was that policy an epic clusterpuck or what .... I would say YEP

Edited December 13, 2015 by LomSak27

[SgtRock]

Pinot, on 13 Dec 2015 - 09:15, said:

Chicog, on 12 Dec 2015 - 22:00, said:

Yeah and I know 73 year olds that can't tell the difference between a taser and a handgun.

But in your case we only have your word for it.

My guess is that you couldn't hit a cow's ar$e with a handful of rice at your age.

You see what you did? All the old wingnuts had to chime in that they can still hit a gnat's ass at 5 miles. Jeesh!

I can't even hit the bowl on a regular basis anymore and I'm younger than that old fart!

Remember the old Churchill line, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"? The loony right has changed that to, "The only thing to embrace is fear itself."

All these bigoted cowards with their big guns...pathetic

Pinot. I think you need to lay off the vino

It is the Loony right that is saying enough is enough.

The liberal left are quite happy to take up the schuckt

[BlindMagician]

Check out the guy at the very back he is 70 plus , and they wonder why there are so many shootings..

what does that comment mean? he might be the best in the group......and might of actually done some good...already..(and on his own). How would you know? Perhaps you think older guys can't hit a target?

I know more than a few 60-70 year old Marines who can still put one in the middle of your forehead at 200 yards. I'm one of them.

Yeah and I know 73 year olds that can't tell the difference between a taser and a handgun.
But in your case we only have your word for it.

My guess is that you couldn't hit a cow's ar$e with a handful of rice at your age.

My guess is your guess is wrong.

I'm 78 and I could still make a head shot from 200 yards. Might miss the forehead by a couple
of inches but it still wouldn't matter to the recipient.

Okay,okay, we believe you, you can still kill someone, well done.

[Publicus]

Publicus, on 12 Dec 2015 - 23:31, said:

Something for you to think about.

For all your bluster, redneck gun nut slurs, who are not patriots merely idiots.

You have no idea how many potential attacks these people may have stopped by just being rednecks. Nor the FBI, Nor the CIA or whatever other alphabet soup America has.

You might want to tone down the rhetoric.

Quantify please thanks.

One cannot be expected to support vacant claims, ghostsbusters of the bad guys only they can see, nor can one support unknown or unknowable guessed at stuff The post refers to...well ..nothing. The post presents the unknowable that may perhaps be known only to and kept by rednecks. Rednecks running around with guns under their bushman beards.

Rednecks.

Trying to put forth the unknowable as a rationale is truly desperate not to mention vacuous.

Can't recall ever having seen anything like this.

You do understand the word '' Potential '' ?

You cannot quantify the unknown.

Security Services Worldwide are not in the habit of releasing details of '' Potential '' attacks until long after the event, and then usually during court proceedings during a trial, or they are actively seeking the perpetrators and are hoping for help from the General Public.

I am surprised that an individual, such as yourself is not even aware of the basics.

You have no idea how many potential attacks these people may have stopped by just being rednecks. Nor the FBI, Nor the CIA or whatever other alphabet soup America has.

So from one post to another post, does no one have an idea or does someone have an idea.......

Not surprised you're confusing yourself. Potentially of course. In fact actually.

The starting point here is for you to figure out whether you're coming or going because you just ran into yourself on the way back.

Coming and going.

Going and coming.

Hey down there....drop the shovel so we can lower a rope to you and pull you out.

[Scott]

I think we can drop the discussion about who can shoot what at any particular age. We can also drop the replies. It's off-topic.

Edit: Post removed.

[MZurf]

Check out the guy at the very back he is 70 plus , and they wonder why there are so many shootings..

If he is 70+ then he certainly has kept himself in shape.

These folks are not the reason why there are so many shootings. What I see are some unsophisticated folks, for sure. However, I also see men who understand the responsibilities of gun ownership and who are trained in the use of firearms and firearms safety. I'm not afraid of physically and mentally fit individuals like this. These are not the people who go on gun rampages. Sorry.

"....physically and mentally fit individuals like this."

That's debatable. And what's absolutely mind blowing is that these guys are actually allowed to strut around in public with semi automatic guns!!!

Edited December 13, 2015 by MZurf

[Felipesed]

That's debatable. And what's absolutely mind blowing is that these guys are actually allowed to strut around in public with semi automatic guns!!!

Why it it "absolutely mind blowing"?

In the USA, in the majority of states, one is allowed to carry a firearm for personal protection, a privilege (a right, really), that European citizens are denied.

The people in the Paris theatre were like sheep in a slaughterhouse, awaiting death - are you OK with that?

[SgtRock]

Publicus, on 13 Dec 2015 - 09:42, said:

SgtRock, on 13 Dec 2015 - 08:50, said:

You do understand the word '' Potential '' ?

You cannot quantify the unknown.

Security Services Worldwide are not in the habit of releasing details of '' Potential '' attacks until long after the event, and then usually during court proceedings during a trial, or they are actively seeking the perpetrators and are hoping for help from the General Public.

I am surprised that an individual, such as yourself is not even aware of the basics.

You have no idea how many potential attacks these people may have stopped by just being rednecks. Nor the FBI, Nor the CIA or whatever other alphabet soup America has.

So from one post to another post, does no one have an idea or does someone have an idea.......

Not surprised you're confusing yourself. Potentially of course. In fact actually.

The starting point here is for you to figure out whether you're coming or going because you just ran into yourself on the way back.

Coming and going.

Going and coming.

Hey down there....drop the shovel so we can lower a rope to you and pull you out.

Who is confused ? Me or you ?

WASHINGTON — Federal investigators are continuing to review information about other possible attack plans involving the San Bernardino shooters, based in part on interviews with the man who provided the two semi-automatic rifles used in last week's assault that left 14 dead, a federal law enforcement official said.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/12/10/san-bernardino-farook-malik/77111838/

Terrorist attacks are aborted for many reasons. Rednecks cutting about with firearms will certainly be one of them.

[MZurf]

That's debatable. And what's absolutely mind blowing is that these guys are actually allowed to strut around in public with semi automatic guns!!!

Why it it "absolutely mind blowing"?

In the USA, in the majority of states, one is allowed to carry a firearm for personal protection, a privilege (a right, really), that European citizens are denied.

The people in the Paris theatre were like sheep in a slaughterhouse, awaiting death - are you OK with that?

What a silly question. I guess you have several examples of massacres averted by armed civilians in the US or elsewhere?

[Felipesed]

That's debatable. And what's absolutely mind blowing is that these guys are actually allowed to strut around in public with semi automatic guns!!!

Why it it "absolutely mind blowing"?

In the USA, in the majority of states, one is allowed to carry a firearm for personal protection, a privilege (a right, really), that European citizens are denied.

The people in the Paris theatre were like sheep in a slaughterhouse, awaiting death - are you OK with that?

What a silly question. I guess you have several examples of massacres averted by armed civilians in the US or elsewhere?

It is not a silly question, please answer it yes or no.

If you answer yes, then obviously you do not want people to have the right of self-defense.

If you answer no, then what are your solutions to the problem?

As to your question, I believe that one of the highjacked planes in 2011 was prevented from crashing into its intended target by the action of the passengers.

Also there are daily reports of everyday crime being stopped by armed citizens, either in public places or home robberies.

Edited December 13, 2015 by Felipesed

[chuckd]

Having said all that, terrorists nearly always look for soft targets. Soft targets would be identified as those targets that

don't have armed personnel around them to interfere with the terrorist's shooting spree.

Yeah, let's not forget suicide bombers, they don't really care how soft their targets are.

Care to share with us a list of all those suicide bombers that have hit the Continental US so far?

The only two I can think of tried to get a little action in Garland, Texas. How did that one work out?

[MZurf]

That's debatable. And what's absolutely mind blowing is that these guys are actually allowed to strut around in public with semi automatic guns!!!

Why it it "absolutely mind blowing"?

In the USA, in the majority of states, one is allowed to carry a firearm for personal protection, a privilege (a right, really), that European citizens are denied.

The people in the Paris theatre were like sheep in a slaughterhouse, awaiting death - are you OK with that?

What a silly question. I guess you have several examples of massacres averted by armed civilians in the US or elsewhere?

It is not a silly question, please answer it yes or no.

If you answer yes, then obviously you do not want people to have the right of self-defense.

If you answer no, then what are your solutions to the problem?

As to your question, I believe that one of the highjacked planes in 2011 was prevented from crashing into its intended target by the action of the passengers.

Also there are daily reports of everyday crime being stopped by armed citizens, either in public places or home robberies.

"It is not a silly question, please answer it yes or no."

I will, but first you have to answer either yes or no to the following question;

Have you stopped beating your wife?

"As to your question, I believe that one of the highjacked planes in 2011 was prevented from crashing into its intended target by the action of the passengers."

Are you saying there were armed civilians onboard a plane?? Remember, we are talking about ARMED civilians.

"Also there are daily reports of everyday crime being stopped by armed citizens, either in public places or home robberies"

Your opinion isn't very credible without quoting sources. Besides, we're not talking about "everyday" crime but mass murder.

Edited December 13, 2015 by MZurf

[lostboy]

lostboy, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:53, said:

SgtRock, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:22, said:

Publicus, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:00, said:Publicus, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:00, said:

USA does not need these gunslingers assigning themselves their own chosen task of defending the homeland against the people who live in the homeland, i.e., Americans who are Muslim.

These rednecks are gun nuts who are cooking up any reason they can to pull the trigger. This is what these crackpots live for.

This tiny number of Americans believe that running around looking for people to shoot makes 'em patriots. They are idiots.

The homeland needs to be defended against rednecks with guns. Second Amendment is not a license to run around on the loose under a flag to kill people you want to be your enemy.

Something for you to think about.

For all your bluster, redneck gun nut slurs, who are not patriots merely idiots.

You have no idea how many potential attacks these people may have stopped by just being rednecks. Nor the FBI, Nor the CIA or whatever other alphabet soup America has.

You might want to tone down the rhetoric.

When you make an attack like this, you are expected to provide some measure of quantifiable justification. let me start off. I would suggest that zero attacks by terrorists have been prevented by gangs of nuts like the ones you are boosting.

You continue to issue instruction to posters as if you have some authority. Publicus is American. You are not. It is his homeland that is affected by this phenomenon, not yours. The CIA is prevented by law from operating on US soil. I really don't think you or these other rednecks have anything to offer America's security and intelligence agencies.

And you can provide quantifiable justification ?

The clue was in the word '' Potential '' The unknown cannot be quantified.

Phrases such as '' I would suggest '' '' I really don't think '' along with your false and wrong assumptions shows you for what you really.

You have a good day now

Quantifiable? Dunno. You were the one making the asinine claim.

Most of the World does not choose to live in the fantasy construct of right wing loons. We choose confidence over fear; engagement over cravenness; progress over stagnant conservatism. I enjoyed the movie Minority Report with Tom Cruise. But it was fantasy. Precognition does not exist as far as I know.

I see you keep doubling down on your silliness in subsequent posts. Keep entertaining us with your fantasy scenarios. it is a mildly amusing diversion. Meanwhile the normal people will deal with reality and work their way though it as best we can.

Your third sentence is missing a verb. I really want to know what my assumptions show me as according to your razor wit.

[lostboy]

Publicus, on 12 Dec 2015 - 21:00, said:

USA does not need these gunslingers assigning themselves their own chosen task of defending the homeland against the people who live in the homeland, i.e., Americans who are Muslim.

These rednecks are gun nuts who are cooking up any reason they can to pull the trigger. This is what these crackpots live for.

This tiny number of Americans believe that running around looking for people to shoot makes 'em patriots. They are idiots.

The homeland needs to be defended against rednecks with guns. Second Amendment is not a license to run around on the loose under a flag to kill people you want to be your enemy.

Something for you to think about.

For all your bluster, redneck gun nut slurs, who are not patriots merely idiots.

You have no idea how many potential attacks these people may have stopped by just being rednecks. Nor the FBI, Nor the CIA or whatever other alphabet soup America has.

You might want to tone down the rhetoric.

When you make an attack like this, you are expected to provide some measure of quantifiable justification. let me start off. I would suggest that zero attacks by terrorists have been prevented by gangs of nuts like the ones you are boosting.

You continue to issue instruction to posters as if you have some authority. Publicus is American. You are not. It is his homeland that is affected by this phenomenon, not yours. The CIA is prevented by law from operating on US soil. I really don't think you or these other rednecks have anything to offer America's security and intelligence agencies.

Is it OK with you if I wade in on this? I am an American, Texan and formerly lived in the city these young lads were protecting.

According to your exacting standards for posting entitlement, then that should make me imminently qualified to offer an

opinion on the subject.

Having said all that, terrorists nearly always look for soft targets. Soft targets would be identified as those targets that

don't have armed personnel around them to interfere with the terrorist's shooting spree.

Your comment that zero attacks have been thwarted is meaningless. How do you know there wasn't a plan to attack this

very same recruitment center where the armed civilians were in attendance but plans were changed by the terrorists when

they saw the armed personnel?

Your statement is speculative at best.

I understand you are not an American and my guess would b a European, Australian or a dual nationality even. Since you

are also not an American, please tell us exactly what you might have to offer America's security and intelligence agencies that

SgtRock might not possess..

My guess is the only contribution you could possibly make would be even more rhetoric than we have already been subjected to.

Well, Happy St Jodoc's Day, Charles. I do hope you raise a glass of Lao Khao to the brave Gallic Defender of the Faith.

I would sincerely love to address your points but in the world in which you are I engage, it seems that some citizens are more equal than others and my replies to your points seem to be out of order. I do thank you for acknowledging my Leadership however. I actually prefer a non-complicated life and the times that I have led teams are generally forced on me and I try to complete the tasks quickly and move on. However, I do believe in leading by example and I do hope you don't find meeting certain standards too onerous.

Also, in defence of rhetoric, I do find it more refreshing to hear the thoughts and arguments of people expressed in their own words instead of the quite boring 'argument by proxy'. You know, when people trawl through ideological publications and post the thoughts of others and say "Let me just offer this".

Again, I won't bite at the tidbits you offer and provide more information about myself but bi-nationality is still going down the wrong track. I keep telling you.

You ask me directly what contribution I could make to the US Security Agencies? Why? I make no claim otherwise? The ramblings of some ex British cop notwithstanding, I have always maintained that the kind of terrorism that your 'volunteers' are seeking to combat is a criminal activity best countered by the criminal justice institutions in each country. Australia and the UK have both demonstrated this. Military and para-military responses are entirely inappropriate. From most recent memory, I think the lessons from the Balkans is pertinent in demonstrating the consequences of nationalism and chauvinistic extremism gone mad.

I have told you before that I have lived, worked and paid taxes in America in my past. I do not claim this gives any more rights or insights than any other person, American or non American. I would like to continue but it seems we are destined to be constantly thwarted in our relationship by the powers that be. No matter. I look forward to your next offering.