Another shooting - San Bernadino California.

[redleghunter]

Or something the shooter interpreted about Christianity.

There's another poster (not the one you responded to) that seems to be making your point.

 

[TLK Valentine]

All you can do is insert the software but that doesn't make you the creator of that software.

We're not talking software, we're talking about a child.

 

[Smidlee]

We're not talking software, we're talking about a child.

A male inserts it's DNA into a living egg. Then the miracle of life begins.

 

[Belk]

That's a good point. However, we can observe (not judge) other's actions and see if they are consistent. If someone proclaims they follow religion/faith "A" and religion/faith "A"'s founder/doctrine says "Y", yet the person violates "Y"...we can determine at the very least if they are consistent in action and not just word of mouth.

Agreed. However what we see is a whole bunch of special pleading and taking things out of context. For example taking a single verse and claiming it invalidates certain sections of their holy book but not other sections from the same area. They then refuse to extend the same consideration to other peoples holy books.

Same as if someone proclaims they follow religion/faith "B" and religion/faith "B"'s founder/doctrine says "Z", and that person visibly performs "Z"...we can determine at the very least if they are consistent in action and not just word of mouth.

Yet in our post-modern relativist Western World, "A" can be "Z" and "B" can "Y" without any observation. For the relativist there is a universal "X" which varies from individual to individual, society to society until various forms of "X" reach fault lines and clash. And to the relativist all of the multitude of "X's" are equally valid (supposedly if you believe everyone who preaches tolerance are actually tolerant). There is a problem when one or more "X"(s) proclaim their "X" is more valid than all other "X's". This tension comes about due to "X's" not having universal absolutes. What we end up with is shifting subjective situational ethics. The "X" factor usually works well until a Big "X" comes along and forces their "X" on everyone else. At that point the big X has become a "T".

I am not even going to try to follow this.

 

[redleghunter]

And that has to with double standards, how? From 1980-2005, 6% of attacks in America have been from "Islamic extremists" according to the FBI. Terrorism in the US is far more likely to be committed by white supremacists (i.e. usually devout Christians in the US).

Actually the stats you have include Latino Narco crime in with white supremacists. There was a poster on another thread who sent out some links (she was making the same point as you are). Here's some of the data:


http://www.globalresearch.ca/non-mu...0-of-all-terrorist-attacks-in-america/5333619


So you can see from the pie chart (found at link above), that 42% of what is deemed terrorist attacks between 1980 and 2005 was some form of Latino attacks, probably Narco Terrorism and gang activities. The next largest number comes from Extreme Left Wing Groups. Don't blame for the data, Princeton did the number crunching..

 

[Belk]

Actually the stats you have include Latino Narco crime in with white supremacists. There was a poster on another thread who sent out some links (she was making the same point as you are). Here's some of the data:


http://www.globalresearch.ca/non-mu...0-of-all-terrorist-attacks-in-america/5333619


So you can see from the pie chart (found at link above), that 42% of what is deemed terrorist attacks between 1980 and 2005 was some form of Latino attacks, probably Narco Terrorism and gang activities. The next largest number comes from Extreme Left Wing Groups. Don't blame for the data, Princeton did the number crunching..

View attachment 166878

I had not heard of the site so I Google searched it.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch

Not saying that the data you presented is inaccurate but the site it comes from appears to be somewhat notorious.

 

[Hetta]

It's a hinkey looking site for sure.

 

[redleghunter]

Where?

Think he meant worldwide. Don't know the timeframe. Decent source here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks

http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/guess-how-many-islamic-terror-attacks-since-911/

For US:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/americanattacks.htm

http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/big-list-of-muslim-terror-attacks-in-u-s-since-911/

 

[redleghunter]

I had not heard of the site so I Google searched it.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch

Not saying that the data you presented is inaccurate but the site it comes from appears to be somewhat notorious.

Somewhat notoriously on the left. Which surprises me and why I shared it.

 

[Belk]

Somewhat notoriously on the left. Which surprises me and why I shared it.

Yes, they described it as the WND of the left.

 

[redleghunter]

Horrific killings like those in San Bernardino inevitably produce the anti-gun crowd putting the blame on guns and calling for more gun control. I think this part of the article is worth mentioning. It's not the first time after a shooting this has been mentioned in a follow-up story of course.

"Federal authorities say that the two assault rifles and two handguns used in the San Bernardino massacre were all purchased legally in the United States."

Gun Violence In America (In 6 Uncomfortable Charts)


Submitted by Tyler Durden on 12/19/2014
(Yes I know, Tyler Durden! But it's the link to the Epidemiology report and the synopsis in the charts at that one site that I wanted to make available.)

Well I was already on planning to get my sons Henry .22 lever action rifles for Christmas. Good start up rifle. Have the NRA shooting course set up for after the holidays with range to follow after.

 

[redleghunter]

They deny it, but that seems to be the fantasy that most of the "we need guns to protect us from tyranny" types have in mind. Point out the difficulties of an irregular , unsupported, non standard equipped group with no C3 or log chain fighting a nation state and watch the splutter. Point out that what armed citizens deciding to "fight tyranny" is exactly what our San Bernardino friend or the Tsarnaevs were doing and watch the mindsplode.

You live in Australia right?

 

[redleghunter]

Think Mr. San Bernadino would have killed and injured 10s of people if he'd had a sledgehammer?

Not if everyone else had a sledgehammer too!

 

[redleghunter]

You're absolutely right. At fifteen years old I went to work for a gun store. Being around that environment and owning alot of guns I had those types of fantasies. Red Dawn, fighting some foreign invader, defending my home from robbers etc. But that was when I was a teenager. What scares me is the fact that I personally know grown men that go about their lives still having those adolescent moronic fantasies

All the more reason for you and the other fantasizers not to be trusted with fire arms. Some gun owners actually have them for home self defense, hunting and shooting ranges. Some people golf and some people like to go to the range and shoot targets. So as a law abiding citizen why must my 2nd Amendment rights be curtailed because other people knowingly break the law?

We don't outlaw cars because of drunk drivers and inattentive drivers. Not to mention outlaw cell phones because of the rise in texting while driving deaths. No we have laws which address improper use of objects including guns.

 

[crjmurray]

All the more reason for you and the other fantasizers not to be trusted with fire arms. Some gun owners actually have them for home self defense, hunting and shooting ranges. Some people golf and some people like to go to the range and shoot targets. So as a law abiding citizen why must my 2nd Amendment rights be curtailed because other people knowingly break the law?

We don't outlaw cars because of drunk drivers and inattentive drivers. Not to mention outlaw cell phones because of the rise in texting while driving deaths. No we have laws which address improper use of objects including guns.

You're just a winner.

 

[Belk]

All the more reason for you and the other fantasizers not to be trusted with fire arms. Some gun owners actually have them for home self defense, hunting and shooting ranges. Some people golf and some people like to go to the range and shoot targets. So as a law abiding citizen why must my 2nd Amendment rights be curtailed because other people knowingly break the law?

We don't outlaw cars because of drunk drivers and inattentive drivers. Not to mention outlaw cell phones because of the rise in texting while driving deaths. No we have laws which address improper use of objects including guns.

So we can go ahead and license all gun owners and create a national database for all weapons? Have yearly checkup on all weapons to ensure they are properly maintained? Have Remedial safety courses for people who do not follow the laws in a satisfactory manner? Since we are comparing them to vehicles and all?

 

[interpreter]

You should have a blog

Funny you should say that. I started a blog about my predictions today at wordpress.com, called the7lastplaguesdotcom, and I added another prediction. My post about predicting the San Bernandino shooting is now # 1 in one of the Google Searches I made today, so let's see if this one makes it:

7. The Good News is, the last face of Satan will soon be so soundly defeated (by a coalition of 24 nations that drop exceedingly great hail)
That He wont be heard from again for a millennial.
It begins in 2016 when a 24th Christian nation, Montenegro,
Will be added to the coalition called NATO. (see Rev. 4:4, 16:21, 20:4)

 

[crjmurray]

Funny you should say that. I started a blog about my predictions today at wordpress.com, called the7lastplaguesdotcom, and I added another prediction. My post about predicting the San Bernandino shooting is now # 1 in one of the Google Searches I made today, so let's see if this one makes it:

Oh thank God...

 

[interpreter]

Give me one single example of Jesus killing his enemies, or Jesus commanding his disciples to kill His enemies.

Luke 19:27. Also see Matthew 10:34 and Luke 22:36

You are a false prophet because you presume to make your own interpretations superior to the word of God.

Why do you keep saying that? I give scripture for everything I say on cf. If it is not in the Bible, I don't say it.

 

[Armoured]

You live in Australia right?

Yes. So?