But was it terrorism or just an angry couple who happened to be Muslims? Terrorism is usually a targeted attack because of an ideology or retaliatory action taken against the target for a wrong the attackers feel. We do not have THE REASON for the attack yet.

In this case it looks like the couple was stressed out (married with a new baby), might have had some cultural differences/stress assimilating into western ways of life, and the man had been diagnosed with some form of disability or he would not have been on a website for disabled people. His diagnosis may be been wrong. He was judged or classified based on western beliefs on how someone should think/behave, but his upbringing is based on a different culture, that can lead to misunderstanding, mislabeling, misdiagnosis.

For anyone to conclude that this was terrorism may be incorrect. If they were not Muslims, would you still think it was terrorism, or would you think it was a couple who went on a rampage?

Are we predisposed as a society to automatically associate Muslims with terrorist acts just because there have been terrorist acts performed by other Muslims?

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by gina]

The revolting rationalizations for their actions that you put forth in this post are vivid illustrations as to exactly why society associates Muslims with terrorist acts, and with justification. This man had a government job as a food inspector, living a decent life in a country that took him in and gave him this opportunity. To blame his behavior on society's cultural insensitivity is beyond disgusting. You look to excuse his murderous rampage, yet feel Muslims are unfairly singled out, wanting it both ways. You should be ashamed.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by rmack]

Latest news said they had 12 pipe bombs, bomb making materials, and 5000 rounds of ammunition in their house/garage......... that doesn't sound like a work place dispute to me......

But was it terrorism or just an angry couple who happened to be Muslims? Terrorism is usually a targeted attack because of an ideology or retaliatory action taken against the target for a wrong the attackers feel. We do not have THE REASON for the attack yet.

In this case it looks like the couple was stressed out (married with a new baby), might have had some cultural differences/stress assimilating into western ways of life, and the man had been diagnosed with some form of disability or he would not have been on a website for disabled people. His diagnosis may be been wrong. He was judged or classified based on western beliefs on how someone should think/behave, but his upbringing is based on a different culture, that can lead to misunderstanding, mislabeling, misdiagnosis.

For anyone to conclude that this was terrorism may be incorrect. If they were not Muslims, would you still think it was terrorism, or would you think it was a couple who went on a rampage?

Are we predisposed as a society to automatically associate Muslims with terrorist acts just because there have been terrorist acts performed by other Muslims?

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by gina]

The revolting rationalizations for their actions that you put forth in this post are vivid illustrations as to exactly why society associates Muslims with terrorist acts, and with justification. This man had a government job as a food inspector, living a decent life in a country that took him in and gave him this opportunity. To blame his behavior on society's cultural insensitivity is beyond disgusting. You look to excuse his murderous rampage, yet feel Muslims are unfairly singled out, wanting it both ways. You should be ashamed.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by rmack]

To blame his behavior on society's cultural insensitivity is beyond disgusting.

I DID NOT say his behavior was due to cultural insensitivity, what I said was that he was labelled as having some sort of disability, which is why he was involved in online dating on a site that was used by people with disabilities. Our culture MIGHT mislabel someone whose ideas and upbringing have things in them we do not understand. I did NOT say we were insensitive to his culture, but I WILL say we have little understanding of Pakistani/Arabian culture norms, much less religious ideas. The most progress we made was to pay victims who we accidentally murdered in our wars on terror.

"you look to excuse his murderous rampage"

I don't excuse that, NOR have I ever. Even regarding 9.11, Osama felt the trade center attacks were an okay thing to do. Mullah Omar denounced them, my beliefs were the same as Omar's. Osama brought up other things, where is the battlefield when the US sends drones and attacks people in THEIR homes and villages, but they are not allowed to retaliate and attack civilians. Only the US is allowed to murder anyone, anywhere, at anytime. Nobody wants to even accept that we do that as foreign policy behavior. Oh but we declare them to be terrorists, and our judgement is infallible, so we can judge and then kill anyone. Well only God knows everything and nobody sitting in the defense dept. of the big chair in DC is God, last I checked, so what gives them that right? Our Congress is not allowed to make any of those decisions or be involved in it.

"yet feel Muslims are unfairly singled out"

It is very clear that because he was a Muslim, people automatically think he is a terrorist.

Now, in this instance finding the bomb material in the garage does support the terrorist ideology of bringing attacks inside the US, but every Muslim is not a terrorist, any more than every blond man is a secret Nazi. We have created a stereotype of Muslims and doing that is not right. We are still bombing in those other countries, you just don't hear about it. Next year we are going to Somalia to start up war there, under the premis that al Shabab is getting too powerful. What should the people of these lands that we go to and bomb think about our actions? Most of them leave and become refugees and return after we leave.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by gina]

News reports are that he had been radicalized. Saddest thing I heard on the news was that neighbors saw suspicious activities over the past weeks but didn't report it as they feared they'd be accused of racial profiling.

Where was he radicalized? I thought it was the woman who was from Pakistan and had been living in Saudi who influenced him, but I don't know that for sure. We would have to know what masjids they went to, who are the imams, and where their religious education came from.

As to racial profiling, Islam is not a race, it is a religion, and there are different branches, and sects. There are Christians that live in Egypt, some of them may be Arabs or Egyptians or from any combination of countries. There are Christians in Lebanon, it's not all Arabs or Sunni Muslims, or Lebanese Muslims, there is a large Shiite Muslim population there also.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by gina]

But was it terrorism or just an angry couple who happened to be Muslims? Terrorism is usually a targeted attack because of an ideology or retaliatory action taken against the target for a wrong the attackers feel. We do not have THE REASON for the attack yet.

In this case it looks like the couple was stressed out (married with a new baby), might have had some cultural differences/stress assimilating into western ways of life, and the man had been diagnosed with some form of disability or he would not have been on a website for disabled people. His diagnosis may be been wrong. He was judged or classified based on western beliefs on how someone should think/behave, but his upbringing is based on a different culture, that can lead to misunderstanding, mislabeling, misdiagnosis.

For anyone to conclude that this was terrorism may be incorrect. If they were not Muslims, would you still think it was terrorism, or would you think it was a couple who went on a rampage?

Are we predisposed as a society to automatically associate Muslims with terrorist acts just because there have been terrorist acts performed by other Muslims?

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by gina]

The revolting rationalizations for their actions that you put forth in this post are vivid illustrations as to exactly why society associates Muslims with terrorist acts, and with justification. This man had a government job as a food inspector, living a decent life in a country that took him in and gave him this opportunity. To blame his behavior on society's cultural insensitivity is beyond disgusting. You look to excuse his murderous rampage, yet feel Muslims are unfairly singled out, wanting it both ways. You should be ashamed.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by rmack]

To blame his behavior on society's cultural insensitivity is beyond disgusting.

I DID NOT say his behavior was due to cultural insensitivity, what I said was that he was labelled as having some sort of disability, which is why he was involved in online dating on a site that was used by people with disabilities. Our culture MIGHT mislabel someone whose ideas and upbringing have things in them we do not understand. I did NOT say we were insensitive to his culture, but I WILL say we have little understanding of Pakistani/Arabian culture norms, much less religious ideas. The most progress we made was to pay victims who we accidentally murdered in our wars on terror.

"you look to excuse his murderous rampage"

I don't excuse that, NOR have I ever. Even regarding 9.11, Osama felt the trade center attacks were an okay thing to do. Mullah Omar denounced them, my beliefs were the same as Omar's. Osama brought up other things, where is the battlefield when the US sends drones and attacks people in THEIR homes and villages, but they are not allowed to retaliate and attack civilians. Only the US is allowed to murder anyone, anywhere, at anytime. Nobody wants to even accept that we do that as foreign policy behavior. Oh but we declare them to be terrorists, and our judgement is infallible, so we can judge and then kill anyone. Well only God knows everything and nobody sitting in the defense dept. of the big chair in DC is God, last I checked, so what gives them that right? Our Congress is not allowed to make any of those decisions or be involved in it.

"yet feel Muslims are unfairly singled out"

It is very clear that because he was a Muslim, people automatically think he is a terrorist.

Now, in this instance finding the bomb material in the garage does support the terrorist ideology of bringing attacks inside the US, but every Muslim is not a terrorist, any more than every blond man is a secret Nazi. We have created a stereotype of Muslims and doing that is not right. We are still bombing in those other countries, you just don't hear about it. Next year we are going to Somalia to start up war there, under the premis that al Shabab is getting too powerful. What should the people of these lands that we go to and bomb think about our actions? Most of them leave and become refugees and return after we leave.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by gina]

I wonder if you realize how loaded this post is with justification for violence against innocents, as long as they are Westerners.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by rmack]

 

But was it terrorism or just an angry couple who happened to be Muslims? Terrorism is usually a targeted attack because of an ideology or retaliatory action taken against the target for a wrong the attackers feel. We do not have THE REASON for the attack yet.

In this case it looks like the couple was stressed out (married with a new baby), might have had some cultural differences/stress assimilating into western ways of life, and the man had been diagnosed with some form of disability or he would not have been on a website for disabled people. His diagnosis may be been wrong. He was judged or classified based on western beliefs on how someone should think/behave, but his upbringing is based on a different culture, that can lead to misunderstanding, mislabeling, misdiagnosis.

For anyone to conclude that this was terrorism may be incorrect. If they were not Muslims, would you still think it was terrorism, or would you think it was a couple who went on a rampage?

Are we predisposed as a society to automatically associate Muslims with terrorist acts just because there have been terrorist acts performed by other Muslims?

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by gina]

The revolting rationalizations for their actions that you put forth in this post are vivid illustrations as to exactly why society associates Muslims with terrorist acts, and with justification. This man had a government job as a food inspector, living a decent life in a country that took him in and gave him this opportunity. To blame his behavior on society's cultural insensitivity is beyond disgusting. You look to excuse his murderous rampage, yet feel Muslims are unfairly singled out, wanting it both ways. You should be ashamed.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by rmack]

To blame his behavior on society's cultural insensitivity is beyond disgusting.

I DID NOT say his behavior was due to cultural insensitivity, what I said was that he was labelled as having some sort of disability, which is why he was involved in online dating on a site that was used by people with disabilities. Our culture MIGHT mislabel someone whose ideas and upbringing have things in them we do not understand. I did NOT say we were insensitive to his culture, but I WILL say we have little understanding of Pakistani/Arabian culture norms, much less religious ideas. The most progress we made was to pay victims who we accidentally murdered in our wars on terror.

"you look to excuse his murderous rampage"

I don't excuse that, NOR have I ever. Even regarding 9.11, Osama felt the trade center attacks were an okay thing to do. Mullah Omar denounced them, my beliefs were the same as Omar's. Osama brought up other things, where is the battlefield when the US sends drones and attacks people in THEIR homes and villages, but they are not allowed to retaliate and attack civilians. Only the US is allowed to murder anyone, anywhere, at anytime. Nobody wants to even accept that we do that as foreign policy behavior. Oh but we declare them to be terrorists, and our judgement is infallible, so we can judge and then kill anyone. Well only God knows everything and nobody sitting in the defense dept. of the big chair in DC is God, last I checked, so what gives them that right? Our Congress is not allowed to make any of those decisions or be involved in it.

"yet feel Muslims are unfairly singled out"

It is very clear that because he was a Muslim, people automatically think he is a terrorist.

Now, in this instance finding the bomb material in the garage does support the terrorist ideology of bringing attacks inside the US, but every Muslim is not a terrorist, any more than every blond man is a secret Nazi. We have created a stereotype of Muslims and doing that is not right. We are still bombing in those other countries, you just don't hear about it. Next year we are going to Somalia to start up war there, under the premis that al Shabab is getting too powerful. What should the people of these lands that we go to and bomb think about our actions? Most of them leave and become refugees and return after we leave.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by gina]

I wonder if you realize how loaded this post is with justification for violence against innocents, as long as they are Westerners.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by rmack]

When the West goes to other countries and kills their civilians, what should the response of the people of those countries be? Tell me what you think their answer to us should be. (and note that they never asked us to come there in the first place to help them solve their 'terror' problems). The Afghans just shoot back when they see us in their lands, they do not come here to do attacks because they understand that jihad is only to be used to defend oneself, one's home, and one's religion. They don't do pre-emptive attacks, like we do, they just retaliate.

Do you think we should be allowed to go anywhere, kill any amount of people we please and have FULL immunity for those actions at all times? That's is what is going on.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by gina]

 

my impression so far is that it may be a mix of many factors.

1. seems to have been radicalized.
2. seems to have been unstable, stressed for some reason
3. seems to have some kind of work problems.

if you are planning on killing alot of people, any target is as good as the next. 2 birds with one stone, kill the people you hate at work and anyone else in the room.

Latest news said they had 12 pipe bombs, bomb making materials, and 5000 rounds of ammunition in their house/garage......... that doesn't sound like a work place dispute to me......

Agreed, sounds like they wanted to do attacks, we don't know if the motivation is personal revenge or if it is retaliation for our foreign policy actions. We are still using drones in Pakistan and other places.

But was it terrorism or just an angry couple who happened to be Muslims? Terrorism is usually a targeted attack because of an ideology or retaliatory action taken against the target for a wrong the attackers feel. We do not have THE REASON for the attack yet.

In this case it looks like the couple was stressed out (married with a new baby), might have had some cultural differences/stress assimilating into western ways of life, and the man had been diagnosed with some form of disability or he would not have been on a website for disabled people. His diagnosis may be been wrong. He was judged or classified based on western beliefs on how someone should think/behave, but his upbringing is based on a different culture, that can lead to misunderstanding, mislabeling, misdiagnosis.

For anyone to conclude that this was terrorism may be incorrect. If they were not Muslims, would you still think it was terrorism, or would you think it was a couple who went on a rampage?

Are we predisposed as a society to automatically associate Muslims with terrorist acts just because there have been terrorist acts performed by other Muslims?

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by gina]

The revolting rationalizations for their actions that you put forth in this post are vivid illustrations as to exactly why society associates Muslims with terrorist acts, and with justification. This man had a government job as a food inspector, living a decent life in a country that took him in and gave him this opportunity. To blame his behavior on society's cultural insensitivity is beyond disgusting. You look to excuse his murderous rampage, yet feel Muslims are unfairly singled out, wanting it both ways. You should be ashamed.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by rmack]

To blame his behavior on society's cultural insensitivity is beyond disgusting.

I DID NOT say his behavior was due to cultural insensitivity, what I said was that he was labelled as having some sort of disability, which is why he was involved in online dating on a site that was used by people with disabilities. Our culture MIGHT mislabel someone whose ideas and upbringing have things in them we do not understand. I did NOT say we were insensitive to his culture, but I WILL say we have little understanding of Pakistani/Arabian culture norms, much less religious ideas. The most progress we made was to pay victims who we accidentally murdered in our wars on terror.

"you look to excuse his murderous rampage"

I don't excuse that, NOR have I ever. Even regarding 9.11, Osama felt the trade center attacks were an okay thing to do. Mullah Omar denounced them, my beliefs were the same as Omar's. Osama brought up other things, where is the battlefield when the US sends drones and attacks people in THEIR homes and villages, but they are not allowed to retaliate and attack civilians. Only the US is allowed to murder anyone, anywhere, at anytime. Nobody wants to even accept that we do that as foreign policy behavior. Oh but we declare them to be terrorists, and our judgement is infallible, so we can judge and then kill anyone. Well only God knows everything and nobody sitting in the defense dept. of the big chair in DC is God, last I checked, so what gives them that right? Our Congress is not allowed to make any of those decisions or be involved in it.

"yet feel Muslims are unfairly singled out"

It is very clear that because he was a Muslim, people automatically think he is a terrorist.

Now, in this instance finding the bomb material in the garage does support the terrorist ideology of bringing attacks inside the US, but every Muslim is not a terrorist, any more than every blond man is a secret Nazi. We have created a stereotype of Muslims and doing that is not right. We are still bombing in those other countries, you just don't hear about it. Next year we are going to Somalia to start up war there, under the premis that al Shabab is getting too powerful. What should the people of these lands that we go to and bomb think about our actions? Most of them leave and become refugees and return after we leave.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by gina]

I wonder if you realize how loaded this post is with justification for violence against innocents, as long as they are Westerners.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by rmack]

When the West goes to other countries and kills their civilians, what should the response of the people of those countries be? Tell me what you think their answer to us should be. (and note that they never asked us to come there in the first place to help them solve their 'terror' problems). The Afghans just shoot back when they see us in their lands, they do not come here to do attacks because they understand that jihad is only to be used to defend oneself, one's home, and one's religion. They don't do pre-emptive attacks, like we do, they just retaliate.

Do you think we should be allowed to go anywhere, kill any amount of people we please and have FULL immunity for those actions at all times? That's is what is going on.

[Edited on 12/3/2015 by gina]

You continue to prove my point.

 

my impression so far is that it may be a mix of many factors.

1. seems to have been radicalized.
2. seems to have been unstable, stressed for some reason
3. seems to have some kind of work problems.

if you are planning on killing alot of people, any target is as good as the next. 2 birds with one stone, kill the people you hate at work and anyone else in the room.

He has a 6 month old baby and has only been married for two years, that in and of itself is a lot of stress. He was at an annual company employee meeting where recognition and awards were given out, he probably didn't get one, or he would not have left the meeting angrily. Many people want recognition from their jobs. He may have needed a promotion, more money to help pay the child costs etc. and didn't get it. He did not have good coping or problem resolution skills or he would not have reacted with violence, having pipe bombs in the garage shows he planned to exact some measure of justice on people or places that pissed him off.

Where was he from in Pakistan or where was his family from? In the tribal regions some disputes are settled by blowing up someone's house, they try to negotiate first, but if that fails, sometimes they do that. That is a cultural thing.

Latest news said they had 12 pipe bombs, bomb making materials, and 5000 rounds of ammunition in their house/garage......... that doesn't sound like a work place dispute to me......

If they founded a couple cases of beer, it sounds like something a crazy redneck might have in his basement. Was it terrorism or a workplace dispute? I really have not idea. Obviously whatever he was planning on doing was thought out for a while. But if it was terrorism, they didn't do a very good job with it leaving their intent in doubt. If I wanted to make a statement as a terrorist I would have left a note or something, especially when you're going to your place of employment. Not sure if going postal is considered being a terrorist these days.

my impression so far is that it may be a mix of many factors.

1. seems to have been radicalized.
2. seems to have been unstable, stressed for some reason
3. seems to have some kind of work problems.

if you are planning on killing alot of people, any target is as good as the next. 2 birds with one stone, kill the people you hate at work and anyone else in the room.

He has a 6 month old baby and has only been married for two years, that in and of itself is a lot of stress. He was at an annual company employee meeting where recognition and awards were given out, he probably didn't get one, or he would not have left the meeting angrily. Many people want recognition from their jobs. He may have needed a promotion, more money to help pay the child costs etc. and didn't get it. He did not have good coping or problem resolution skills or he would not have reacted with violence, having pipe bombs in the garage shows he planned to exact some measure of justice on people or places that pissed him off.

Where was he from in Pakistan or where was his family from? In the tribal regions some disputes are settled by blowing up someone's house, they try to negotiate first, but if that fails, sometimes they do that. That is a cultural thing.

You do need to live by the rules of your country; not the tribal customs of your land of origin. Wonder if he was "vetted"

my impression so far is that it may be a mix of many factors.

1. seems to have been radicalized.
2. seems to have been unstable, stressed for some reason
3. seems to have some kind of work problems.

if you are planning on killing alot of people, any target is as good as the next. 2 birds with one stone, kill the people you hate at work and anyone else in the room.

He has a 6 month old baby and has only been married for two years, that in and of itself is a lot of stress. He was at an annual company employee meeting where recognition and awards were given out, he probably didn't get one, or he would not have left the meeting angrily. Many people want recognition from their jobs. He may have needed a promotion, more money to help pay the child costs etc. and didn't get it. He did not have good coping or problem resolution skills or he would not have reacted with violence, having pipe bombs in the garage shows he planned to exact some measure of justice on people or places that pissed him off.

Where was he from in Pakistan or where was his family from? In the tribal regions some disputes are settled by blowing up someone's house, they try to negotiate first, but if that fails, sometimes they do that. That is a cultural thing.

He killed 14 people because he didn't get an award? Are actually trying to rationalize his motive like that? Tell me about the baby, is the baby better off now. Might well be.

When you enter this or any other country, you are bound by its laws. And, BTW, murder is a felony in Pakistan, even in tribal areas. Where do you come up with this BS?

my impression so far is that it may be a mix of many factors.

1. seems to have been radicalized.
2. seems to have been unstable, stressed for some reason
3. seems to have some kind of work problems.

if you are planning on killing alot of people, any target is as good as the next. 2 birds with one stone, kill the people you hate at work and anyone else in the room.

He has a 6 month old baby and has only been married for two years, that in and of itself is a lot of stress. He was at an annual company employee meeting where recognition and awards were given out, he probably didn't get one, or he would not have left the meeting angrily. Many people want recognition from their jobs. He may have needed a promotion, more money to help pay the child costs etc. and didn't get it. He did not have good coping or problem resolution skills or he would not have reacted with violence, having pipe bombs in the garage shows he planned to exact some measure of justice on people or places that pissed him off.

Where was he from in Pakistan or where was his family from? In the tribal regions some disputes are settled by blowing up someone's house, they try to negotiate first, but if that fails, sometimes they do that. That is a cultural thing.

You do need to live by the rules of your country; not the tribal customs of your land of origin. Wonder if he was "vetted"

He was born in the US. I guess mass shootings have become the tribal custom of America.

my impression so far is that it may be a mix of many factors.

1. seems to have been radicalized.
2. seems to have been unstable, stressed for some reason
3. seems to have some kind of work problems.

if you are planning on killing alot of people, any target is as good as the next. 2 birds with one stone, kill the people you hate at work and anyone else in the room.

He has a 6 month old baby and has only been married for two years, that in and of itself is a lot of stress. He was at an annual company employee meeting where recognition and awards were given out, he probably didn't get one, or he would not have left the meeting angrily. Many people want recognition from their jobs. He may have needed a promotion, more money to help pay the child costs etc. and didn't get it. He did not have good coping or problem resolution skills or he would not have reacted with violence, having pipe bombs in the garage shows he planned to exact some measure of justice on people or places that pissed him off.

Where was he from in Pakistan or where was his family from? In the tribal regions some disputes are settled by blowing up someone's house, they try to negotiate first, but if that fails, sometimes they do that. That is a cultural thing.

Truly touching. Do you have such empathy for all mass murderers, or just the ones who worship the same imaginary friend as you?

Gentleman, take a deep breath. Its just gins; she's expressed these views for at least the last 15 years.

Gentleman, take a deep breath. Its just gins; she's expressed these views for at least the last 15 years.

Maybe so. But they are still disgusting.

Gentleman, take a deep breath. Its just gins; she's expressed these views for at least the last 15 years.

Maybe so. But they are still disgusting.

I am sure somebody, somewhere says the same thing about your views. So what exactly is your point ?

What any of us think isn't going to change what happened or bring anyone back. All the bickering in these threads just shows that most people need to grow up, learn how to respond to any given situation/circumstance in a prosocial manner, and STOP reacting on emotion. It is so predictable.

Gentleman, take a deep breath. Its just gins; she's expressed these views for at least the last 15 years.

Maybe so. But they are still disgusting.

I am sure somebody, somewhere says the same thing about your views. So what exactly is your point ?

What any of us think isn't going to change what happened or bring anyone back. All the bickering in these threads just shows that most people need to grow up, learn how to respond to any given situation/circumstance in a prosocial manner, and STOP reacting on emotion. It is so predictable.

Post of the year.

Gentleman, take a deep breath. Its just gina; she's expressed these views for at least the last 15 years.

I blame piacere...............

Boy did this thread go dead as soon as we discovered that this is a likely act of Islamic based terrorism.

You got that right.

Until now the reason for this shooting is not yet clear.

Gentleman, take a deep breath. Its just gins; she's expressed these views for at least the last 15 years.

Maybe so. But they are still disgusting.

I am sure somebody, somewhere says the same thing about your views. So what exactly is your point ?

What any of us think isn't going to change what happened or bring anyone back. All the bickering in these threads just shows that most people need to grow up, learn how to respond to any given situation/circumstance in a prosocial manner, and STOP reacting on emotion. It is so predictable.

Post of the year.

I can't believe I'm in the position of agreeing with MacKenzie, Jamez and Woods at the same time.

Our society has reached this weird place where not only have we accepted that being a victim of a mass shooting is just something we have to live with, but the motives behind the events are somehow classified in such a way that there are now conditional responses.

Three recent mass shootings...Colorado, Louisiana, California...do the motives of the shooters make all of the victims any less dead?

my impression so far is that it may be a mix of many factors.

1. seems to have been radicalized.
2. seems to have been unstable, stressed for some reason
3. seems to have some kind of work problems.

if you are planning on killing alot of people, any target is as good as the next. 2 birds with one stone, kill the people you hate at work and anyone else in the room.

The work problems appear to be that he had theological disputes with a christian. That explains mass murder. When oh when are we going to wake up? I swear I really think it will take a nuclear bomb going off in an American city and maybe not even then.

Our society has reached this weird place where not only have we accepted that being a victim of a mass shooting is just something we have to live with, but the motives behind the events are somehow classified in such a way that there are now conditional responses.

Three recent mass shootings...Colorado, Louisiana, California...do the motives of the shooters make all of the victims any less dead?

No but it makes a big big difference in whether future victims will be dead. What if these jihadist got in their car and mowed down 14 people standing on a sidewalk? There would be no talk about mass shootings and the victims would be just as dead.

Gentleman, take a deep breath. Its just gina; she's expressed these views for at least the last 15 years.

I blame piacere...............

but who's responsible for the behavior of the same few regulars engaging in the same "discussions", loaded with insults and personal attacks, day after day after day after day...As mentioned, predictable.

I've never seen gina insult anyone.

😛

Yesterday the President stated that it could be workplace violence and today less than a day later an officer involved in the shooting indicates that the attackers pledged allegiance to ISIL. It appears that the Pres. is not being briefed in a timely manner or is intentionally downplaying this as he and his administration have come out with strong assurances after Paris.

Yesterday the President stated that it could be workplace violence and today less than a day later an officer involved in the shooting indicates that the attackers pledged allegiance to ISIL. It appears that the Pres. is not being briefed in a timely manner or is intentionally downplaying this as he and his administration have come out with strong assurances after Paris.

Key word being "could" be. And it certainly looks like it could be workplace violence taken to extreme based on radical views. Whatever the motivation, it certainly isn't the same kind of attack as Paris and in fact I'm not sure there is any precedent based on what I/we know now. In any case, I hate the fact that this has already become a political football from all points on the spectrum but in today's climate that seems rather unavoidable.