Florida Night Club Shooting - at least 20 dead - impact on US elections?

There's no better security than having no guns around.

Are you on drugs? Do they have history in your world? You say such stupid ass things on a regular basis. And you're so proud to wear that crown. It's spectacular, like Hindenburg spectacular.

 

Great, we just need to have an armed guy at the door of every establishment in the country or just stop crazies from getting guns. That's a tough choice there.

 

All the doors, one is not enough.

 

Actually sounds like there was armed security. giddy's head explodes.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...ando-shooting-inside-club-20160613-story.html

It was just after 2 a.m. Sunday. Gruler ran toward the entrance after hearing the shots.

He was met by gunman Omar Mateen. Armed with a .223 caliber AR type rifle and a 9mm semiautomatic pistol, Mateen started exchanging gunfire with the officer.

Gruler quickly realized he was outgunned and called for backup. Gruler retreated and Mateen ran further inside the club.

Lt. Scott Smith and Sgt. Jeffrey Backhaus arrived a couple minutes later and rushed into the club. There was another flurry of shots between them and Mateen.

 

That's fantasy, not reality. The reality is that guns are a part of the world no matter what, especially when there are terrorists out there such as this guy. Better security would have stopped this attack and saved dozens of lives. There's no law that could have created your fantasy of no guns, certainly no law that was constitutional. You should make an effort to join the rest of us in reality and abandon your fantasy world.

 

No it didn't. You've taken the element of surprise out of the solution, so you've really missed the point.... just to make yours. Congratulations, another hollow "victory" for you!

 

France has restrictive guns laws. The ones used in Paris carried a penalty of up to 7 years confinement.

http://www.bustle.com/articles/1238...cks-took-place-in-a-city-with-strict-firearms

Hey I'm fine if we could eradicate every gun from the planet and somehow prevent further manufacturing...... but that ain't gonna happen.

 

Since the shooting Trump is down 1% and Hillary is up .5%.

 

If everyone in bars or nightclubs (presumably drinking alcohol) were armed they would all be safer? Seriously?

Are you gun guys really going to stick with that as a rational solution?

 

So, we can probably agree this event had no real effect at this point. That's just statistical noise probably, right?

 

I would give it another week. The conventional thought was that it would help Trump. Not gaining is a big loss to him.

And it's heartening to see that he didn't make any gain. Tell me people reject his style of nutty divisiveness in time where leaders typically tone down their messages or even set their differences aside, at least momentarily.

 

Yes, what's your problem exactly?

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ozeSrSd1BnI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Seems to work.

 

While I am uncomfortable with the concept of measuring political gain resulting in such a tragedy, since the question was asked... you could have expected Trump to benefit from a terrorist act (whether real or perceived, domestic or foreign, etc). In this instance, Trump (and some of his supporters) reached too far in this (especially Trump's tweets about "being right" and the efforts to link the President to the act). That, coupled with the President's statements and appearances took away any political gain that trump might have benefited from.

Clinton, perhaps correctly, played a largely downplayed role. Curious if she might have scored some points by taking a largely "consoling" role. We've never had a women President... curious how her gender would effect the "Consoler in Chief" role of the President?

 

I'm pretty sure no one suggested that, saying that places where people gather need better security isn't suggesting that a bunch of drunk club people carry. A few worth a damn armed guards could have stopped that thing before it began just like the cop in Garland Texas that stopped the 2 terrorists armed with assault rifles and body armor.

Honestly that's the solution, we need better trained cops and armed security for venues in order to make it harder to find soft targets. 1 well trained cop or armed security guard stops this attack before it even gets inside because the guy had an assault rifle that he couldn't hide. It would be harder to stop someone armed with handguns, but well trained cops or security guards could do it.

 

Hemingway carried his Colt Woodsman when he went drinking in Manhattan. I'm not sure what he carried when went drinking in Catalonia. Are you saying we shouldn't drink our whiskey neat and kill fascists? Are you a Falangist?

 

Well, at the risk of further demeaning a sad thread, we all know what happened to Hemingway...

More guns is never the answer.

 

It is not guns, dumbasses. It is assault rifles. The off duty cop was outgunned going against an AR-15. That's why he couldn't stop the shooter. There is no reason for AR-15, AKs, or any version of assault rifles/machine guns to be EASILY available.

 

Didn't stop the cop in Garland when he stopped 2 would be terrorists that had assault rifles AND body armor....but sure, narratives and whatnot AR-15's are tanks.

 

The gun the Orlando shooter used was a Sig Sauer MCX, not an AR-15. That doesn’t change much.

carry on...

 

A predefined security perimeter surrounding free speech event ["Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest"] is quite different from random nightclub at 2:00 AM in the morning. Those two terrorists were gunned down outside of the Culwell Event Center. There were 4 SWAT members there also...

CNN: Garland, Texas, shooting suspect linked himself to ISIS in tweets

CNN: Two shot dead after they open fire at Mohammed cartoon event in Texas