NDL Forum

DRiccio21 wrote:don't be so quick to want politicians to rush to make change.

many events like this create horrible policies that are filled with backdoor deals that get passed due to public pressure.

preventing people from doing this is incredibly hard if they don't have fear of losing their own lives. it doesn't matter what policies we put into place, they aren't stopping any time soon

Not gun/violence related... but this is exactly what just happened in Ohio with the marijuana ballot. Group A rushes a shit marijuana legalization topic to ballot, Group B counters with an equally shitty proposal that not only blocks the Group A ballot, but it has far reaching implications on how future items are brought up. In the end the initial issue doesn't win anyway and the 2nd issue gets passed creating a pretty epic pile of shit for future items. Well done Ohio.

jsence2 wrote:

ReignOnU wrote:

jsence2 wrote:This isn't mental illness.

This isn't deranged individuals.

This is terrorism. Let's stop saying it's just white people shooting, and start calling it what it is. Three individuals, dressed in tactical military gear, who had an organized plan to hurt/kill innocent people is TERRORISM.

And if I hear one more Republican politician offer "thoughts and prayers".....that doesn't change a DAMN THING, you morons. How about you actually offer a plan to stop this stuff?!

So it's the Republican politician's job to stop terrorism? Got it. France is probably screwed.

No, my point is the whole "oh, prayers sent, back to doing whatever I was doing" is a rhetoric that needs to stop. Something needs to change. Simply sending "thoughts and prayers" isn't going to fix this epidemic.

So it's the Republican politicians job to stop terrorism? Seems like a pretty heavy burden for just them to have to fix it.

Sounds like it was a residence for 1 of them. Waiting for the chief's update.

ReignOnU wrote:Sounds like it was a residence for 1 of them. Waiting for the chief's update.

Same thing I am reading as well. Sounds like one was at the event left and came back with two more people, one being female possibly?

So do we have all 3 suspects yet?

packsyd2284 wrote:

ReignOnU wrote:Sounds like it was a residence for 1 of them. Waiting for the chief's update.

Same thing I am reading as well. Sounds like one was at the event left and came back with two more people, one being female possibly?

Saw that stuff also... seems like a lot of chatter that news outlets aren't touching right now.

Not sure if valid... website looks questionable...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... arook.html

NBC running with it... also stating another suspect was his brother.

Interesting if true...

http://transparentcalifornia.com/salari ... =farook&y=

Name Job title Regular pay Overtime pay Other pay Total
benefits Total pay &
benefits
Syed R Farook Environmental Health Spec II
San Bernardino County, 2014 $53,437.51 $1,505.88 $3.58 $22,133.75 $77,080.72
Syed R Farook BUSINESS TAXES REPRESENTATIVE
State of California, 2014 $42,774.36 $1,783.88 $1,333.47 $22,816.48 $68,708.19

Previous government worker, which would have explained the rental of the area for the government gathering.

I can see how the cops would leave open the idea of terrorism, yet state that it's only an option. Just taking all of the 'evidence' at a high level, I could see domestic issues as well.

This guy had an interesting afternoon:

Twitter and stuff running with the Farooq Saeed name (switched)... either way, safe bet he's not Southern Baptist.

Not long til people run with the name and start jumping to allllll kinds of conclusions

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... ailyNewsTw

A man who identified himself as Farook’s father told the Daily News his son worked as a health technician inspecting restaurants and hotels.

“I haven’t heard anything. He worked in a county office,” Farook's dad told The News. “He’s married and has a kid. We’re estranged because my wife got the divorce, and they are together. She doesn’t want to see me.”

Farook said he hasn’t seen his son in some time.

“He was very religious. He would go to work, come back, go to pray, come back. He’s Muslim.”

I find this amusing... the #1 trending topic on Twitter: #SanBernadino

There's 1 problem with that...

They had GoPro cameras on them as they were committing thus crime, RC cars supposedly strapped with explosives, and their house was described as an IED making facility. What is crazy for me is they had a 6 month old child.

Some people in their neighborhood said that people were seen going in and out of the house over the last couple of weeks, probably not related but could add intrigue to this story if there is any connection to what happened yesterday.

I really don't want to hear about gun control, California has the harshest laws for gun owners and these two were able to get the weapons. Criminals will always find a way to get their hands on guns. New laws only hurt law abiding citizens.

Crowes lives in California right? What are your thoughts since it is your state

Gun control will never work.
The bad guys will always be able to get their hands on them, so no matter what is done, guns will never be completely gone.

I, for one, don't care what laws they want to change and how hard they want to make it for a citizen to get a gun, as long as I am allowed to get one if I pass their checks.
I am a law abiding citizen, that would have no problem passing whatever it is to own a gun, so I feel they can make harsher ways to own guns.

And I am not going to get into a debate, but my feelings are that every citizen that can pass the checks and go through proper training should own guns.
Chicago put a ban in, in 1982 for guns. Any gun purchased and registered prior to this, the owner was allowed to keep.
But it was illegal to buy or possess an unregistered gun in Chicago from 1982 until the ban was lifted in 2013.

And how did that ban work out for the city of Chicago?
It just proves, at least in my mind, that no matter what you do, the criminals will find a way to do what they want to do.

Homicides in Chicago per year:
1928: 498
1964: 390
1965: 396
1966: 512
1966: 510
1967: 548
1967: 522
1968: 645
1969: 715
1970: 810
1971: 824
1972: 711
1973: 862
1974: 970
1975: 818
1976: 814
1977: 823
1978: 787
1979: 856
1980: 863
1981: 877
1982: 668
1983: 729
1984: 741
1985: 666
1986: 744
1987: 691
1988: 660
1989: 742
1990: 851
1991: 928
1992: 943
1993: 855
1994: 931
1995: 828
1996: 796
1997: 761
1998: 704
1999: 643
2000: 633
2001: 667
2002: 656
2003: 601
2004: 453
2005: 451
2006: 471
2007: 448
2008: 513
2009: 459
2010: 436
2011: 435
2012: 516
2013: 441
2014: 432

Lolllllllllllllll