RM I've been weary of labeling this from the get go. It doesn't mean it's not that. How does calling the guy in Charelston a radical Christian change what yesterday's events were?

 

Side note, the guy from Charelston seemed more like a racist than a Christian. Didn't he say something along the lines of you're taking/hurting all of our women?

 

But if we're labeling based upon religion, then it doesn't matter the sub-cause, does it? I mean, we don't yet know why these shooters went on a rampage. Yet we've already decided that they are radical Muslim terrorists. And maybe they are.

 

The white guy in Charleston gets a pass because he was "just" a racist? We don't call him a Christian Terrorist, and frankly, if my memory serves me, we didn't want to label him a terrorist of any sort, nor racist.

 

Yes, it looks like there is a connection. But the fact is, it's not usually radical Muslims committing this sort of crime here in the US.

 

I don't understand your point.

 

Most gun murders in this country aren't mass shootings.

 

More people die in car crashes than by guns.

 

Does that make it less serious that radical Islamic terrorists might have attacked and killed 14 Americans?

 

RM I've been weary of labeling this from the get go. It doesn't mean it's not that. How does calling the guy in Charelston a radical Christian change what yesterday's events were?

 

Side note, the guy from Charelston seemed more like a racist than a Christian. Didn't he say something along the lines of you're taking/hurting all of our women?

 

He seemed more like a nut to me. He's crazy, and doesn't deserve to see the light of day ever again. I'm all for the death penalty in his case.

 

Doesn't have anything to do with this case.

 

But if we're labeling based upon religion, then it doesn't matter the sub-cause, does it? I mean, we don't yet know why these shooters went on a rampage. Yet we've already decided that they are radical Muslim terrorists. And maybe they are.

 

The white guy in Charleston gets a pass because he was "just" a racist? We don't call him a Christian Terrorist, and frankly, if my memory serves me, we didn't want to label him a terrorist of any sort, nor racist.

 

 

We don't call the white got in Charleston a Christian terrorist because there's nothing to support that at this point.

 

I'm also not certain what he did is even going to be classified as terrorism. Are you?

And with this as a response, I'm out of this conversation. It's obviously not going anywhere.

 

That's bowing out gracefully. Well done.

 

It's best we keep this thread on track.

It can't be just me that's confused on when we can call a shooting "terrorism" and when we can't.

 

So if we get rid of all of the pipes....

 

And all the bombs...

I don't understand your point.

 

Most gun murders in this country aren't mass shootings.

 

More people die in car crashes than by guns.

 

Does that make it less serious that radical Islamic terrorists might have attacked and killed 14 Americans?

 

No. My point is this. While I get and understand that we are facing a threat from radical Muslims, many are using this to villianify all Muslims. And making it out that this is typical of radical Muslims in this country. It's not. There have been very few mass shootings committed by Muslims here in the US.

 

We don't need to label the perpetrator of these crimes as Muslim, Christian, white black or whatever.

 

No. My point is this. While I get and understand that we are facing a threat from radical Muslims, many are using this to villianify all Muslims. And making it out that this is typical of radical Muslims in this country. It's not. There have been very few mass shootings committed by Muslims here in the US.

 

I haven't seen anyone condemning all Muslims because of this attack.

Guns are not leaving anytime soon. If they do it won't change the hate that is being directed from radical Islam towards the US.

 

They are here weather you want to agree or not.

 

On your next vacation you might schedule a trip to Israel. This will be what we will have to become to remain a society that enjoys freedoms that we currently do.

Why does it seem like some of you will deny this is radical Islamic terrorism no matter what evidence is provided?

 

Some are hesitant to put radical/extremist together with Islam/Muslims due to a percentage of people who would take it out on normal Muslims.

 

We have Ritzheimer who is traveling across the country who has made threats to Muslims in New York, that the authorities can't seem to find. Then we have a group who are outside of mosques in Texas with guns protesting.

 

But for normal citizens they won't think of harming innocent Muslims, there are a few that would though.

RM I've been weary of labeling this from the get go. It doesn't mean it's not that. How does calling the guy in Charelston a radical Christian change what yesterday's events were?

 

Side note, the guy from Charelston seemed more like a racist than a Christian. Didn't he say something along the lines of you're taking/hurting all of our women?

1. Most, if not all, racist groups base their ideology on Christian beliefs.

2. I know that Roof gathered some of his beliefs from the Council of Conservative Citizens, a white supremacy group, that wants to get America back to Christian values or something to that effect.

 

I don't particularly like Christianity but I'm smart enough to realize people like Dylann Roof are nut jobs who don't represent the religion as a whole. A lot of Christians struggle to make that distinction with terrorists who practice Islam...

On your next vacation you might schedule a trip to Israel. This will be what we will have to become to remain a society that enjoys freedoms that we currently do.

Agreed, sadly that is where it's headed, and fast.

But if we're labeling based upon religion, then it doesn't matter the sub-cause, does it? I mean, we don't yet know why these shooters went on a rampage. Yet we've already decided that they are radical Muslim terrorists. And maybe they are.

 

The white guy in Charleston gets a pass because he was "just" a racist? We don't call him a Christian Terrorist, and frankly, if my memory serves me, we didn't want to label him a terrorist of any sort, nor racist.

 

I'm not dismissing what you're saying so please don't take it as such.

 

If the FBI had stated there was a trail of him seeking out or communicating with Christian radicals(yes they exist;somehow) then it would be different. The FBI has already linked yesterday's shooting suspects to known terrorists. I sure as hell wish this weren't the case because it changes things. We can hope, wish and pray for it not to be what it is, sometimes it just is.

 

I love this country, I love our ability to openly discuss this type of thing. It's fruitful in a lot of ways.

Name a few.

 

(Looking for decision-maker types, not Barbra Streisand)

 

Well with your qualifier in there, of course there isn't going to be any. Decision makers are elected, and they know that advocating for the banning of guns in their entirety would be political suicide. But, decision makers aren't the only ones who influence the public. Fareed Zakaria is one of those who advocates a gun ban.

 

Aside from decision makers and other who have influence, which make up a relatively small portion of the american populous, there are still those out there who believe in banning guns. If you want to remove your qualifier, as of October of this year roughly 27% of those participating in the Gallup pole (attached below) believed handguns should be banned. While that number is a little lower than I expected, it is still a sizable amount and meets my previous statement that their are "plenty" that want guns to be banned.

 

Guns | Gallup Historical Trends

 

Also, were you ever able to come up with a response to the question I asked you 20 pages ago? Isn't there an undeniable trend that these mass shootings occur in gun free zones?