http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-for-Syria-in-London-tube-machete-attack.html Just because there weren't mass casualties, does not mean this isn't newsworthy. We all know the issue here. We all know the only solution. Pressure moderates for reform. Stop immigration from Arab countries, Iran, Pakistan. Gun control, knife control, suicide bomb control becomes a moot point when you're dealing with a stone age ideology that sees progress as need for backlash. Civilization needs Allah control.
There are so many of these guys in England and France and Germany. And it's not just these guys, the reason they exist is because there is connected tissue to the mainstream of that ideology.
Heroic videos of him being tased in the link. Police demonstrated alot of nerve and patience when dealing with angry muslim #300,143,765 . Would have hated to see the sad excuse Obama would give about knife control if this happened in the US.
Plenty in the US and Russia as well. Practice far more discretion and stealth while trying to integrate into society , which makes them more dangerous. You'll always hear, "he was such a nice, normal, moderate guy" after a surprise attack, or a narrative about a poor , innocent man being radicalized. E.g. Syed farook, Boston bomber. Let's pull our heads out of our assessment and acknowledge each person is individually responsible for the decisions they make. Then, let's look at the big picture and see what ties these constant attacks together.
Yes, it is very annoying - the lawyer and the brother-in-law both acted like..."oh, he was such a soft-spoken guy, I have no idea what happened to him, he was always calm and peaceful...but someone made fun of his beard". It's actually quite evil, the angle they are trying to play - guy murders 14 unarmed people together with his wife, has stacked pipe bombs and guns for a long time, but what this statement is trying to suggest is this: It was really all the fault of the person who allegedly made fun of this poor guy's beard.
There is nothing inherently 'Islamic' about that. In general, in all cultures, family members often will irrationally defend other family members.
Na......see....if he had an AR-15, he would have killed a dozen or more.....would countless more. A knife........cant do the same damage. I sure know which one I would rather "control".
Have the relatives of any of the non-Muslim crazies who mass-murdered people recently come up with insinuations hinting that their relative must have been provoked into the action (equivalent to that weird statement that the guy was supposedly mocked about his beard), while at the same time making demands to see their ideology (whatever it is) respected (equivalent to the statement by the lawyer that freedom of religion (for Islam) needs to be strengthened - a weird statement considering context: source and timing)? I'd like to see evidence of that. Also, did you see the video of the father of the murderer choosing to arrogantly ignore journalists' questions and just getting into his car and driving off? How about a word of remorse or, at least, compassion for the victims of your son's actions?
Point being, he went to a public place with an intent to kill and acted on it. Gun, knife, switchblade or ball point pen, do you not see a problem with that? The fear of going deeper into the core of the issue as opposed to playing it safe with damage control, blinds many.
I thought criminals could get guns no matter what? Maybe he decided his knife was a superior killing tool and left his AR15 at home.
What about some common sense pipe bomb and IED control like what the San Bernardino ISIS followers had? Oh, wait, they're both illegal already.
Damn, it's a good thing this guy didn't live in this country or he would have had easy access to an assault rifle and there would be a lot more people killed/injured.
He might have still used a knife, you know since there are 5 times as many homicides a year using knives than all rifle related homicides combined. I don't have a number for just assault rifles. Of course, who cares about facts, let's just be really scared of a name.
LOL, which part is "unlikely" the fact that 5 times as many homicides in the US are with knives than rifles? A knife or a handgun are MUCH easier to conceal which allows a person to get close to their target. If you have a rifle in your hands, people see you coming a long way off.
67% of murders in America are done with guns. Mostly hand guns. https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-20
And that shows that more people are beaten to death with no weapon used at all than are killed by rifles, but yet every time there is a shooting we hear about how bad assault rifles are.
It's not every time there's a shooting, it's every time there's a massacre. Gun control is about gun... control... not rifle control but keep on with your useless tangent. Maybe throw out some more fake stats to back yourself further into a corner.
It's unlikely that someone like that in this country would use a knife to attempt to go on a mass murder rampage when guns are so readily available compared to England. I don't know about that first part. And you didn't really provide any evidence that it's true. Even if it is, it's irrelevant. You can replace "assault rifle" with "gun" in my original post and the point would still stand. What do you mean "get close to their target" exactly? If someone like him were trying to go on a rampage in this country on the equivalent of the London Underground (i.e. a subway station) I highly doubt they'd use a knife. It's just dumb to think that. These type of people aren't playing assassins creed on xbox. They don't need to "get close" to a specific target. They're just trying to take out whoever they can. Someone like that would obviously use a gun. It's good that this happened in a place with strict gun control laws so that this guy couldn't kill anyone (hope the seriously injured person recovers).
