Regardless of motive, we know for sure that was a gun nut who took advantage of the lax gun control laws in America in order to build up his armament. Way too many gun nuts out there.
It should definitely be checked out. But when has Islamic State previously taken credit for these sorts of killings here before when they were not associated with them? Not saying it is beyond them to lie and take credit where they deserve none. But this would be unusual if they claimed credit but had no connection with this person. Like you said, it needs to be checked out. But now we finally have at least one possible motive that makes any kind of sense. That is something to start with, in any case.
Don't think a recently converted person would necessarily stick to ISIS teachings when facing a swat unit or being heavily emotional.
To people disrepecting our nation and our flag by kneeling during the national anthem of football games. But so far the Islamic State angle appears to be the most compelling, if only for the reason that this group routinely engages in these sorts of murderous activities.
When you live in a free society, this is the risk you run. I know you'd like to shred the constitution, and strip people of their rights so that you'll feel better up until the next incident like this..... but when we had the shootings in Paris, did their gun control laws help them? Of course they didn't. Now that said, I do support banning fully automatic weapons. There's just no civilian purpose for them whatsoever.
I also don't see somebody going through with the deadliest mass shooting in American history suddenly going back on the entire reason he ended up there. Talk about sunk cost.
Did you have a stroke and reply to the wrong post/thread accidentally? It appears "most compelling" to anybody who wishes it to be the reason. To the rest of us, it remains one of many equally plausible possibilities.
When the shooting first happened, somebody made a thread in Clutchfan's political discussion board about it, and made posts after post before anyone responded. Now I am being accused of "politicizing" the shooting when I noted the guy's posting pattern. Right. This guy probably got excited because he saw this stuff on 4chan.
Antifa is claiming this too. I don't think anyone should believe anything these terrorist organizations say at this time. The truth should emerge eventually.
Antifa? I didn't know there was a formal entity that represented Antifa? Is there now? To be fair, this is not consistent with Antifa's M.O., at least up until now. They are terrorist thugs who violently attack innocent people for their own selfish political goals, but to the best of my knowledge they have not killed anyone yet.
Right wing nutters seem to be the ones who routinely do this type of thing. Then they scream about fake news. Irony.
Also, before we start talking about changes to the law, did the guy have the weapons legally to begin with? I'm pretty sure you need a federal firearms license to buy fully automatic weapons as is....did he have one?
you accused him of being uninterested in the story because the culprit wasn't muslim. Yes, that's politicizing an event. You can play dense if you want though. BTW I said I had no problem with politicizing the event. If someone thinks this is justification for legislative action then why not say so. Probably should wait for more information though. nobody even knows if he had automatics weapons. the guy was a pilot who owned two planes. surprised he didn't just fly one into the crowd.
