Mass Shooting at LGBT Nightclub in Orlando

[twinsissv]

This is what I hate about classification and all of the political bs that follows. Whether it is Sandy Hook or Charleston or Orlando---it is always the same for me....innocents dying by someone firing guns....all of the other details are lost for me. If the killers could not get their hands on weapons they would have a harder time trying to kill so many with a blade.

Australia faced this same problem and apparently found a way to solve it. So there really is a way to save peoples' lives? Oh.

 

[TygerLily]

Orlando nightclub shooting: Read about the victims

Thanks, Sylvia.

CBC has been writing profiles as well (has been updated throughout the day): http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/orlando-shooting-victims-named-1.3631811

My heart breaks for their families and friends.

 

[skatingfan5]

Who cares about age? The fact that they died at all is bad enough, whether the victims were 20 or 50.

Whether one is young or old, it isn't any more or less horrific to be murdered or less of a loss. But as someone who is well over 50, I find it especially tragic when people much younger are killed. One of the victims was celebrating his 21st birthday -- they were just getting started on their adult lives. I understand that others may feel much differently about this, but it always hits me especially hard when a young person is killed. Perhaps my personal experience makes me feel this way.

 

[Nan]

I can not wrap my mind around this. There is nothing that can help me understand this kind of hate.

 

[Aussie Willy]

Australia faced this same problem and apparently found a way to solve it. So there really is a way to save peoples' lives? Oh.

We basically had a Prime Minister who said "F*ck them" and tightened the gun laws after the Port Arthur Massacre. He just had the balls to do it. As much as I hated John Howard it was the best thing he did. He realised that it was a minority that wanted the guns, not the majority so he did what was in the best interests of the majority. There are people who still complain about it, but it doesn't stop people having guns. They just cannot have certain types and they have to go through pretty rigirous screening to get one.

You may also care to read this article about gun ownership in Australia which talks about how more guns are coming into Australia and has other links. But we still don't have the same problem as the US. I do think it is because culturally we just don't have the same headspace as the US. And also we don't think of guns as a right back up by a constitution which seems to be the prevalent argument for gun lobby in the the US.

 

[overedge]

Whether one is young or old, it isn't any more or less horrific to be murdered or less of a loss. But as someone who is well over 50, I find it especially tragic when people much younger are killed. One of the victims was celebrating his 21st birthday -- they were just getting started on their adult lives. I understand that others may feel much differently about this, but it always hits me especially hard when a young person is killed. Perhaps my personal experience makes me feel this way.

I think the oldest person on the list (on the Orlando city website) was 50. I agree with you, it isn't any less sad when someone dies, but for that many young people to be killed at once is especially tragic.

 

[Vash01]

Who cares what his supporters say? They won't listen one way or another but someone needs to call him out on his lies and they need to splash it all over the country so that he doesn't get any new supporters.

I wish this would happen.

 

[twinsissv]

Interesting how this killer walked into a gun shop bought a handgun and an AR-15 assault weapon. He had to wait three days to get the handgun, but he was able to take the AR-15 assault weapon home immediately with him that very day? Holy crap!
We're doomed!

 

[Artistic Skaters]

Where are the responsible gun owners demanding a ban on assault rifles? How is there not a coalition within the NRA demanding change about gun access?

NRA primarily supports & promotes the business interests of gun manufacturers, so it's doubtful such a discussion from their individual membership would be encouraged to any meaningful extent. Most likely those members would have to seek outside sources or be persuaded by other groups to support legislation, etc.

** A Brief History of America's Massive Gun-Buying Spree - How the NRA & gun makers exploited politics & paranoia to sell millions of weapons :

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/05/gun-industry-nra-assault-weapon-timeline

Among the weapons used in Sunday's devastating mass shooting at a gay nightclub in Orlando was a rifle similar to an AR-15, the civilian version of an assault rifle originally designed for the US military. The immense popularity of the AR-15 is just one chapter in the recent rise of the American gun industry. As the National Rifle Association, bankrolled by the nation's biggest gunmakers, has fanned fears of an imminent crackdown on gun owners, a buying spree has put ever more deadly weapons into Americans' hands.

 

[Angelskates]

We basically had a Prime Minister who said "F*ck them" and tightened the gun laws after the Port Arthur Massacre. He just had the balls to do it. As much as I hated John Howard it was the best thing he did. He realised that it was a minority that wanted the guns, not the majority so he did what was in the best interests of the majority. There are people who still complain about it, but it doesn't stop people having guns. They just cannot have certain types and they have to go through pretty rigirous screening to get one.

You may also care to read this article about gun ownership in Australia which talks about how more guns are coming into Australia and has other links. But we still don't have the same problem as the US. I do think it is because culturally we just don't have the same headspace as the US. And also we don't think of guns as a right back up by a constitution which seems to be the prevalent argument for gun lobby in the the US.

And that's the thing. Even people who didn't/don't support Howard, supported his stance on guns after Port Arthur. Once was enough. It wasn't even a debate in the end. There was no question things had to change. Once was enough. 35 people dead, 20-something injured was enough. We still have gun crime, but we haven't had another incident like Port Arthur, and we don't read of many accidental gun deaths, either.

I agreed about the different headspace, too. We have never really had a huge gun culture in Australia. I don't know anyone who has ever felt the need to own a gun for protection (did that start in the US from having such easy access to guns in the first place?), I don't think we even had/have gun shows. We didn't have the Opposition arguing against Howard's stance on guns. Everyone understood that once was enough, that we didn't want it to happen again, and something had to be done. In the US, they'll never have that. The laws will never pass, the NRA has too much power, and the nut job politicians like Trump with never allow things to change.

I honestly can't understand people like @Wyliefan owning a gun for protection, but then saying they store it safely. Safely means ammunition and gun both locked and stored separately, which means it a house break-in situation, it won't help. The number of accidental gun deaths and injuries in the US (especially with kids) floors me. And people think they have their guns stored safely. But then, I'd never consider shooting someone to protect my property, and I'm pretty much as anti guns as you can get.

This incident really breaks my heart, mostly because every time I see the news of something like this, I also know it won't be the last time - nothing will change in my lifetime.

And then when you add in the treatment of Muslims because this shooter was Muslim, and people denying this was a hate crime against the LGBT community, well, I just want to stop reading the news and social media altogether.

(But man, that Tony's speech - tears for a different reason...)

 

[Allskate]

Not to mention it was a nightclub. Add some guns to a crowded, dimly lit, loud environment filled with drunk people. What could possibly go wrong

A lot could go wrong. There was an off-duty police officer doing security who exchanged shots with the murderer, but that obviously didn't work out well. I doubt that untrained people in the bar would have done better. And you're not going to have a whole lot of people in Orlando who want to dance with a weapon.

Where are the responsible gun owners demanding a ban on assault rifles? How is there not a coalition within the NRA demanding change about gun access? Is there one and it just doesn't get press?

I have a friend whose husband is a member of the NRA. The NRA constantly warns its membership that any regulation of guns is a slippery slope towards Obama succeeding in his quest to take away everyone's hunting rifles and other guns. And the gun manufacturers make a lot of money, including from assault rifles. The demand for and price of firearms go up every time there is a mass killing like this one. Gun manufacturers' stock prices go up too. Most politicians are not willing to stand up to the NRA because the NRA will spend a lot of money to defeat them and what these politicians want most is to keep their seats, not to serve their constituents and country. In polls, most Americans support regulations that would close the loopholes in background checks and regulate assault weapons and large capacity magazines. But they don't have the power of the NRA and aren't as driven in their voting as NRA members are.

 

[agalisgv]

Not sure where this should be posted, but reports coming out shooter was a fairly regular patron of the club he attacked. Apparently he had been going there for the past three years.

http://www.coastreporter.net/homici...do-gay-hotspot-some-regulars-recall-1.2277201

Newest report saying he had a profile on a gay dating app.

 

[Allskate]

Newest report saying he had a profile on a gay dating app.

That is bizarre. Massive self-loathing?

 

[Angelskates]

That is bizarre. Massive self-loathing?

It's impossible for us to know. It could just be he was thinking of using it to lure someone to kill or harm them.

 

[Prancer]

It's impossible for us to know. It could just be he was thinking of using it to lure someone to kill or harm them.

For three years?

 

[Angelskates]

For three years?

Planning?

 

[rfisher]

I'm not surprised. I figured he was gay himself and couldn't come to terms with it.

 

[Prancer]

Planning?

For three years?

I'm not surprised. I figured he was gay himself and couldn't come to terms with it.

That might be. Whatever his motivations may have been, I don't think his views on religion were very clear. He told people he worked with that he was part of Al-Qeada and also Hezbollah. That's pretty confused.

 

[rfisher]

For three years?



That might be. Whatever his motivations may have been, I don't think his views on religion were very clear. He told people he worked with that he was part of Al-Qeada and also Hezbollah. That's pretty confused.

Not to play arm chair psychologist, because there will be plenty of that, if he was gay it would have been in direct conflict with his religious beliefs and those of his parents which would have made the situation impossible. I had a Spanish friend who was gay, but denied it for years because of his parents beliefs and expectations. He tried to solve the problem with religion even to the point of considering the priesthood. The irony of his life was that his first sexual encounter was with a cloistered monk. He finally came to the States just to be free. I'm sure the forensic psychologists will dissect this guy's life, but I won't be surprised if more witnesses come forward to say he'd had gay encounters with them and he just couldn't handle the conflict between who he was and what he thought he should be.

 

[jlai]

Ok, I'll come in with a more drastic view on safety in America and guns.
From what I've seen in my state, as compared to what I've seen in Chinese cities I lived in, people here are generally more lax in safety. By that I mean, the houses are more easily broken into, and in a handful of communities, some leave their doors unlocked. Some even leave their key around their front porch in case their kids couldn't find their own key. And the windows are easily broken into. Houses are built for comfort, not for security, where I live now.

That's the sort of things that would be unthinkable in Chinese cities. I've talked to people from Nigeria, India, Malaysia, etc., and in high crime areas, people generally ARE a lot more careful about their belongings, and their homes(or apartments, etc) would have more than protection than the front / back door protection that you see around here. That would mean bars, metal railings, etc etc.

Having a home built more for comfort does give rise to drastic action when someone does break into your house. But the thing is, if the culture changes, or if people are more used to homes that are built more for protection than comfort/aesthetics, perhaps they won't need guns. JMHO, basing it on one of US's more gun friendly states.

 

[Aussie Willy]

Ok, I'll come in with a more drastic view on safety in America and guns.
From what I've seen in my state, as compared to what I've seen in Chinese cities I lived in, people here are generally more lax in safety. By that I mean, the houses are more easily broken into, and in a handful of communities, some leave their doors unlocked. Some even leave their key around their front porch in case their kids couldn't find their own key. And the windows are easily broken into. Houses are built for comfort, not for security, where I live now.

That's the sort of things that would be unthinkable in Chinese cities. I've talked to people from Nigeria, India, Malaysia, etc., and in high crime areas, people generally ARE a lot more careful about their belongings, and their homes(or apartments, etc) would have more than protection than the front / back door protection that you see around here. That would mean bars, metal railings, etc etc.

Having a home built more for comfort does give rise to drastic action when someone does break into your house. But the thing is, if the culture changes, or if people are more used to homes that are built more for protection than comfort/aesthetics, perhaps they won't need guns. JMHO, basing it on one of US's more gun friendly states.

Totally disagree. It is the attitude to guns generally that is the issue, not how people secure their houses. I would say people in Australia culturally live as you described in your first paragraph, however we don't feel the need to have guns to protect ourselves or our property. That is because we just don't have the same attitude towards guns.

 

[MacMadame]

Having a home built more for comfort does give rise to drastic action when someone does break into your house. But the thing is, if the culture changes, or if people are more used to homes that are built more for protection than comfort/aesthetics, perhaps they won't need guns. JMHO, basing it on one of US's more gun friendly states.

We forget to lock our doors all the time and we don't own guns. The two things have nothing to do with each other.

 

[MacMadame]

On a different note, I found this summary of what we know right now to be helpful:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...ign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20160613

 

[jlai]

We forget to lock our doors all the time and we don't own guns. The two things have nothing to do with each other.

Did I say they are statistically correlated? No, just that the lack of security gives rise to guns as a justification for some. How about having houses built for security in the first place so there is no reason to have to attack anyone? Not that it will ever happen in America who don't live with this concept in their mind but at least it is more likely than gun control.
I never understand the concept of having an easily broken in home and then say you need a gun to protect it.

 

[jlai]

Totally disagree. It is the attitude to guns generally that is the issue, not how people secure their houses. I would say people in Australia culturally live as you described in your first paragraph, however we don't feel the need to have guns to protect ourselves or our property. That is because we just don't have the same attitude towards guns.

I know that but in America there are people who believe in guns to protect their property. I am saying it makes no sense to have an easily broken in home and then turn around and say you need a gun. Which is what happens in my state I believe.

I am trying to explain how those ppl come to believe what they believe and how it doesn't make sense because they could have chosen to make the house more secure

 

[WildRose]

Totally disagree. It is the attitude to guns generally that is the issue, not how people secure their houses. I would say people in Australia culturally live as you described in your first paragraph, however we don't feel the need to have guns to protect ourselves or our property. That is because we just don't have the same attitude towards guns.

It's the same in Canada. We don't barricade ourselves in our homes and we certainly don't feel the need to buy guns to protect ourselves. The sale of guns is heavily controlled and they are mostly used for hunting, or in the case of farmers and ranchers, to protect their livestock from predators. We have a problem with illegal weapons being smuggled in by criminals from the US so Canada would really like to see the US enact some sort of responsible gun control.

 

[Aussie Willy]

I know that but in America there are people who believe in guns to protect their property. I am saying it makes no sense to have an easily broken in home and then turn around and say you need a gun. Which is what happens in my state I believe.

I am trying to explain how those ppl come to believe what they believe and how it doesn't make sense because they could have chosen to make the house more secure

I think regardless of how secure your property is, if you are someone who believes that a gun is going to make you more secure, you will get a gun. It is like people who keep baseball bats and other weapons under their bed. They will do it anyway, regardless of what security measures they put in place.

 

[Cachoo]

So one group of people were rescued with the SWAT team slammed into the building. But I do remember seeing some texts from people trapped in another bathroom for 25 or 30 minutes and then the announcement that "he is here."

I am NOT placing blame on Orlando police. But maybe the best response is not to wait. And I harken back to those young men on the train in France last year. The shooter's gun jammed but they were not sure about that as they ran head long with the front man thinking that he was about to be shot as the gun was aimed at him and clicking. If many people rush a gunman who is intent on killing them they "might" have a chance. But I know how paralyzing fear can be and I know I would have been a deer in the headlights but maybe their military training taught them to react. Perhaps we should find a way to learn from that because I don't see guns being outlawed soon and you are always going to have sick men and malcontents who are free to roam (and buy guns.)

I do commend the police and the hospitals for saving as many as they did save.

 

[Anita18]

So one group of people were rescued with the SWAT team slammed into the building. But I do remember seeing some texts from people trapped in another bathroom for 25 or 30 minutes and then the announcement that "he is here."

I am NOT placing blame on Orlando police. But maybe the best response is not to wait. And I harken back to those young men on the train in France last year. The shooter's gun jammed but they were not sure about that as they ran head long with the front man thinking that he was about to be shot as the gun was aimed at him and clicking. If many people rush a gunman who is intent on killing them they "might" have a chance. But I know how paralyzing fear can be and I know I would have been a deer in the headlights but maybe their military training taught them to react. Perhaps we should find a way to learn from that because I don't see guns being outlawed soon and you are always going to have sick men and malcontents who are free to roam (and buy guns.)

I do commend the police and the hospitals for saving as many as they did save.

The thing is, attacking the shooter ONLY works if he's not expecting it. The element of surprise is the most important weapon of an unarmed person. Which means charging him when he's close enough, and it seems that the heroes of the train incident had. They were close enough to intervene and surprise him.

If he can see you coming, it's too late, because he can shoot you. And when he's holed up with hostages, it's FAR too late. He'll be sitting around waiting for someone to act out of line and then shoot them. If there's a hostage situation, you have to wait and plan.

 

[allezfred]

Have to say am not surprised that the shooter now seems to have had problems coming to terms with his sexuality. Homophobia and homophobic acts a lot of the time stem not from a fear of gay people, but the fear of being gay oneself.