Nothing worth mentioning is happening in Orlando Florida.

[Al Swearegen]

Al,

If you'd bothered to read the articles I pointed to, you would have had your explanation, suitably backed up. The one in four claim is meaningless as it is not based in fact. Why is this? Because those statistics are not available. Also, as most of the organisations who collect and use these numbers for something else than their own agendas point out, comparisons with other countries are problematic and frequently irrelevant because of the varying definitions of the crimes and how statistics are collected.

You'd know this if you had read the articles. You'd know that Australia topping the kidnap statistics is a perfect example of what happens when you do compare crime statistics without bothering to check the numbers.

But instead you went for the drama and for the easy but largely irrelevant points. Fail.

BTW, I notice that you're not actually backing up anything yourself. There are no figures to your increased crime hints in Sweden, only a link to dramatic play with numbers by a hate group calling themselves a think tank, no figures to support that supposed sudden increase in crime proportional to the sudden increase in Syrian refugees. Nothing but guesses. And why is that? Because there are no publicly available numbers on what they claim, and because they use the numbers that are available in, shall we say, a somewhat liberal fashion. It's akin to that lawyer Scrap posted a video of the other day, about radical Islam support.

Of course, closing the US borders for Muslims might bring down something. Maybe one or two of the millions of people who'd otherwise have crossed that border would commit their crimes somewhere else. Who knows? You sure don't, and Trump doesn't, because none of you has backed up anything. So yes, I'm still calling that statement bigoted since the only thing it does is singling out a group.

You know what would help even more than shutting out the Muslims? Closing those borders for everybody.

Yet doing that would not have prevented Orlando either.

Kidnapping rife here? Too right. Our dingoes steal babies. Our crocodiles "kidnap" European tourists who swim in our billabongs

Yes the rape crisis in Sweden is just a one article thing.

https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHZL_enAU691AU691&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=swedish%20rape%20crisis

Damn!

Oh and this maybe one or two out of the millions. Where are you getting YOUR figures from? Comey states there are 900 active investigations (not closed investigations like Mateen's two investigations were) and he suspect NOT one or two but potentially dozens. Probably in the same way that there were not on or two bad eggs out on New Year's Eve sexually assaulting women in Cologne, or molesting women and children in Swedish swimming pools, or forming rape gangs in Rotherham, or blowing up the World Trade Centre, or Blowing up the Brussels Airport or Terrorising Paris.

But Hell, you can keep downplaying it to be one or two in a million. Why not? Just do me a favour, do not extend this dismissiveness outside of this argument and encourage your female family or female friends to go to your local swimming pool by themselves unless it is during a gender segregated time (introduced to reduce such sexual assaults). Because you know you can talk crap all you want on here but keep your loved ones safe.

The only group I have singled out is Radical Muslims. Show me otherwise. (Yes showing that I said I supported a Muslim freeze on Immigration UNTIL America can confidentially keep out radicalised Muslims (singling out) and let only the moderate and decent Muslims in (not singling out), is NOT singling out Muslims as a whole nor is it being bigoted. You aren't really stupid enough to think so are you? I would not imagine you are. Surprise me.)

[MLA]

Gun ownership is actually not a constitutional right in the US, but it's what NRA would like you to believe. The Second Amendment s about the right to a well-regulated militia, not about every idiot being allowed to buy a semi-automatic (hence the "well-regulated").

But we happen to have a lawyer in our midst. Why not ask him?

You don't have to be a lawyer, it's a well known Supreme Court decision that affirmed that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own guns.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

DC v. Heller is not great precedent yet.  It's only 6 years old and easily reversed now that the conservative majority has been laid to rest. Just today SCOTUS refused to hear a challenge to a statewide assault weapons ban.  They wouldn't stop Congress from imposing one at this point.

[MLA]

This is how I see it.
Sweden's population is a little over 9 million.
France is a little over 64 million.

The US has an estimated population of 323 million as of 2016.

Actually for the size of the country, the diversity, and the population, I think it could be a lot worse.

Russia (over 143 million, and a lot bigger) has stricter gun laws, and double the murder rate.

Mexico has passed some very strict gun laws over the years, hasn't helped them much either. They still beat us by a mile.

Some might say well you can expect that...damn crazy Russians...crazy Mexicans.

But the US is full of crazy Russians, Mexicans, Hungarians, Africans, Irish, Italians, Jamaicans, Chinese, Germans, etc.

Find another country as diverse and as big as this one...pack them all in and tell them to "play nice" and see how it goes.

Honestly I feel Orlando shouldn't have happened. This guy was reported by the owner of the gun shop, this guy was investigated prior by them (twice)...I think someone was asleep at the wheel and not doing their job.

We do not need more gun laws, BUT we DO need to boldly enforce the ones already on the books.

This IS the standard NRA talking point, but actually believing it puts you in the very small minority.  77% of Americans are supportive of new gun laws right now.  Universal background checks and not allowing sales to people on a terrorist watchlist.

[odeon]

So yes, I'm still calling that statement bigoted since the only thing it does is singling out a group.

And yet you can't deny it's a certain subset of this group that is responsible for a majority of worldwide terrorism.

They might be the currently largest overall group when counting the number of deaths, but the reason to these are conflicts in five (5) countries. If you look at the rest of the world, including yours, you'd probably be better off denying entry to separatist movements and the like. Or Jews, or those who hate Jews.

Denying Muslims entry is pointless and bigoted, and there is no data to support such an action. You could just as well deny people of East European origin entry. It would be just as useful and probably easier to manage.

You know what would help even more than shutting out the Muslims? Closing those borders for everybody.

Yet doing that would not have prevented Orlando either.

You know what would've prevented it? A correct DX of Omar Mateen that would've not only prevented him from legally buying a gun under existing law, but likely would've locked him up so he couldn't harm others. 

So why don't you? Or better yet, make it just a tiny bit harder for people to buy guns? Imagine what a waiting period of, say, a month would do, or a limit to the rounds of ammunition you could buy. Or a license, and no access to certain types of weapons.

I'm betting all of these things would help a lot more than banning Muslims at your borders, with the added advantage that it would make your country look less bigoted and stupid.

[odeon]

Al,

If you'd bothered to read the articles I pointed to, you would have had your explanation, suitably backed up. The one in four claim is meaningless as it is not based in fact. Why is this? Because those statistics are not available. Also, as most of the organisations who collect and use these numbers for something else than their own agendas point out, comparisons with other countries are problematic and frequently irrelevant because of the varying definitions of the crimes and how statistics are collected.

You'd know this if you had read the articles. You'd know that Australia topping the kidnap statistics is a perfect example of what happens when you do compare crime statistics without bothering to check the numbers.

But instead you went for the drama and for the easy but largely irrelevant points. Fail.

BTW, I notice that you're not actually backing up anything yourself. There are no figures to your increased crime hints in Sweden, only a link to dramatic play with numbers by a hate group calling themselves a think tank, no figures to support that supposed sudden increase in crime proportional to the sudden increase in Syrian refugees. Nothing but guesses. And why is that? Because there are no publicly available numbers on what they claim, and because they use the numbers that are available in, shall we say, a somewhat liberal fashion. It's akin to that lawyer Scrap posted a video of the other day, about radical Islam support.

Of course, closing the US borders for Muslims might bring down something. Maybe one or two of the millions of people who'd otherwise have crossed that border would commit their crimes somewhere else. Who knows? You sure don't, and Trump doesn't, because none of you has backed up anything. So yes, I'm still calling that statement bigoted since the only thing it does is singling out a group.

You know what would help even more than shutting out the Muslims? Closing those borders for everybody.

Yet doing that would not have prevented Orlando either.

Kidnapping rife here? Too right. Our dingoes steal babies. Our crocodiles "kidnap" European tourists who swim in our billabongs

Still not read the article, then? Oh well.

Yes the rape crisis in Sweden is just a one article thing.

https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHZL_enAU691AU691&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=swedish%20rape%20crisis

Damn!

Oh and this maybe one or two out of the millions. Where are you getting YOUR figures from?

The figures that actually are available? From BRÅ, mainly. This is a summary: https://www.bra.se/bra/brott-och-statistik/valdtakt-och-sexualbrott.html.

I guess you didn't read my links, did you?

Comey states there are 900 active investigations (not closed investigations like Mateen's two investigations were) and he suspect NOT one or two but potentially dozens. Probably in the same way that there were not on or two bad eggs out on New Year's Eve sexually assaulting women in Cologne, or molesting women and children in Swedish swimming pools, or forming rape gangs in Rotherham, or blowing up the World Trade Centre, or Blowing up the Brussels Airport or Terrorising Paris.

But Hell, you can keep downplaying it to be one or two in a million. Why not? Just do me a favour, do not extend this dismissiveness outside of this argument and encourage your female family or female friends to go to your local swimming pool by themselves unless it is during a gender segregated time (introduced to reduce such sexual assaults). Because you know you can talk crap all you want on here but keep your loved ones safe.

They are already doing it, and doing it safely. I don't know where you got these ideas from but I can assure you that they are not true. But I guess you'd rather believe in hate groups masquerading as "think tanks".

I had imagined--or rather, hoped--that you'd apply at least some measure of critical thinking to whatever you find on teh interwebz, but apparently not. Bloody hell, Al.

The only group I have singled out is Radical Muslims. Show me otherwise. (Yes showing that I said I supported a Muslim freeze on Immigration UNTIL America can confidentially keep out radicalised Muslims (singling out) and let only the moderate and decent Muslims in (not singling out), is NOT singling out Muslims as a whole nor is it being bigoted. You aren't really stupid enough to think so are you? I would not imagine you are. Surprise me.)

You singled out Muslims as a group, every single Muslim who arrives at the US borders:

Now Hillary Clinton believes that increasing 500% the amount of Syrian Muslims immigrants into America is a great idea. Trump thinks placing a freeze on immigration of Muslims and folks from Muslim dominant countries is the way to go.

I think Trump is being rational but I don't think his immigration policy would be easily implemented or adhered to. It is something though.

No qualifying here, because that came in a later post, probably when you realised how stupid the idea was and wanted to backtrack.

The idea is stupid and unrealistic, in addition to being bigoted. Whatever makes you think that they could ever implement something better than is already there? They've already spent years fine-tuning security checks and so far it's not going brilliantly.

And I reiterate: the border controls would not have stopped Orlando. What's your plan?

[Jack]

This IS the standard NRA talking point, but actually believing it puts you in the very small minority.  77% of Americans are supportive of new gun laws right now.  Universal background checks and not allowing sales to people on a terrorist watchlist.

It's true the biggest gaping loophole in current legislation is private sales. A database is only as strong as the information entered and the proposal of making the NICS universal puts the government in the position of admitting they're the problem; the current system is weak and especially weak in mental health data because state reporting to NICS is voluntary. It's not surprising legislative support has been in the past lacking to expand the system because it means increasing the budget while numerous states have accepted millions in federal grants to fund reporting while basically not giving back much of anything. The government fails by no enforcing states to facilitate existing federal laws. It's definitely a valid talking point; though not a valid argument against funding universal laws of usage.

[Al Swearegen]

Al,

If you'd bothered to read the articles I pointed to, you would have had your explanation, suitably backed up. The one in four claim is meaningless as it is not based in fact. Why is this? Because those statistics are not available. Also, as most of the organisations who collect and use these numbers for something else than their own agendas point out, comparisons with other countries are problematic and frequently irrelevant because of the varying definitions of the crimes and how statistics are collected.

You'd know this if you had read the articles. You'd know that Australia topping the kidnap statistics is a perfect example of what happens when you do compare crime statistics without bothering to check the numbers.

But instead you went for the drama and for the easy but largely irrelevant points. Fail.

BTW, I notice that you're not actually backing up anything yourself. There are no figures to your increased crime hints in Sweden, only a link to dramatic play with numbers by a hate group calling themselves a think tank, no figures to support that supposed sudden increase in crime proportional to the sudden increase in Syrian refugees. Nothing but guesses. And why is that? Because there are no publicly available numbers on what they claim, and because they use the numbers that are available in, shall we say, a somewhat liberal fashion. It's akin to that lawyer Scrap posted a video of the other day, about radical Islam support.

Of course, closing the US borders for Muslims might bring down something. Maybe one or two of the millions of people who'd otherwise have crossed that border would commit their crimes somewhere else. Who knows? You sure don't, and Trump doesn't, because none of you has backed up anything. So yes, I'm still calling that statement bigoted since the only thing it does is singling out a group.

You know what would help even more than shutting out the Muslims? Closing those borders for everybody.

Yet doing that would not have prevented Orlando either.

Well that was all a big text dump.

You sent in links? I saw one link you posted, citing low percentage statistics to rape in Sweden. I do not know the organisation that posted and (taking advice from you to dismiss single article reporting on something as an anomaly and likely a hate group with their own agenda) I will accord you the same respect.

So when you look at more respectable and well known sources  Time? Personally I think they are well known but very "Liberal" in both ideology and what they are prepared to print as "fact". But many with Left leanings like what they write and afford it a certain a mount of respect.

http://time.com/4182186/sweden-feminists-sexual-assault-refugees/

So here is a similar issue in Sweden as was in Rotherham. Police reluctant to pursue Immigrant rape abuse and "Taharrush" for fear of being racist and Feminists "don’t want that threat (of male to female sexual violence) used as a political weapons against refugees". In fact in some extremes, giving out some very strange messages

https://www.barritrad.com/swedish-feminists-please-dont-protect-us-get-raped-immigrants/

Even so the incidences of reported rapes notwithstanding all of this is 3 times higher than Zegh-country and twice as high as UK and US.

Seems pretty rapey to me.

Yes Kidnapping IS high in Australia because when Mothers do not get their children back on time (or if they are feeling particularly vindictive) they will call police and report their children as stolen and it gets logged in the records as kidnapping. I have had similar happen to me. It is not anything that reaches the court but it will be recorded as kidnapping.

Still not read the article, then? Oh well.

The figures that actually are available? From BRÅ, mainly. This is a summary: https://www.bra.se/bra/brott-och-statistik/valdtakt-och-sexualbrott.html.

Yup here is that link.

63 per 100 000 in Sweden vs

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/violent-crime/rape
The rate of rapes (legacy definition) in 2013 was estimated at 25.2 per 100,000 females

I dunno, it just looks bad for Sweden at this point. they look a lot more rapey. Why do you think that is Odeon?

What IS happening nowdays in your swimming pools? Here is one of our left leaning sites. (They seriously hate trump and adore Hillary)

http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/world-economy/cologne-is-every-day-europes-rape-epidemic/news-story/e2e618e17ad4400b5ed65045e65e141d

I hear that they initially tried putting guards in place specifically for policing the problems they were having with Migrant Muslim men sexually abusing and women and children. Is this true or not Odeon, you fucking live there. YOUR community.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/29/groping-guards-patrol-swedish-swimming-pools-to-pr/

Now they are trying some good old segregation. Never needed it before but I would be the first to recommend that IF there is a threat then minimising exposure through exclusion (even if some people excluded are not the cause of the problem) is sensible. I may have made this point somewhere else. Did you see that?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/675726/Swimming-pool-segregation-on-the-rise-to-accommodate-Muslim-migrants-in-Sweden

I guess you didn't read my links, did you?

Links? yes please send me links. Oh and back your crap up, you are making my points for me.

They are already doing it, and doing it safely. I don't know where you got these ideas from but I can assure you that they are not true. But I guess you'd rather believe in hate groups masquerading as "think tanks".

I had imagined--or rather, hoped--that you'd apply at least some measure of critical thinking to whatever you find on teh interwebz, but apparently not. Bloody hell, Al.

These groups? What groups. I posted a link at one time and you took exception to it because you did not like the organisation. Since then I have posted many links and sometimes simply the search terms to show you an abundance of like-minded articles to accommodate your inability to move along.

I get it. You do not like this David whoever from whatever the link was now. You do not like his point of view and you disagree. You think he is wrong. I may not. I say "may not" because I am not really sure that was a number of posts ago. I get it. You think that the guy is bad and dangerous and part of a think tank. I got it the first time. I got it the second time. That said now you are trying to turn one site into a group of sites. His site is not legion.

Bloody Hell.

You singled out Muslims as a group, every single Muslim who arrives at the US borders:

Going to call you a liar outright and ask that you neither back track and:

No qualifying here

To show your inability to back this I will say I never said this and you can not show this. Now show me where I said anything about Muslim tourists visiting US on a visa and Muslim Americans coming back home from vacations.

Do not water down

You singled out Muslims as a group, every single Muslim who arrives at the US borders:

No backtracking and no qualifying. Why did you lie. Are you so unable to back yourself? Is your position so very weak that you have to lie? I am curious.

No qualifying here, because that came in a later post, probably when you realised how stupid the idea was and wanted to backtrack.

The idea is stupid and unrealistic, in addition to being bigoted. Whatever makes you think that they could ever implement something better than is already there? They've already spent years fine-tuning security checks and so far it's not going brilliantly.

And I reiterate: the border controls would not have stopped Orlando. What's your plan?

No, its not going brilliantly. As mentioned previously, many people coming to US are difficult to vet because there are so few verifiable databases and records to check. It means taking people on faith that they are who they say they are. Why would that be? Consider the countries that many of these people are immigrating from has no intact infrastructure and databases due to the impact of war and conflict. Quite often people fleeing conflict have little to verify themselves.

I have not backtracked once and you would be an idiot if you thought so. (I don't think you really do think so. I think you are being goofy).

I think the idea is a sound one in EXACTLY the same way that segregated swimming times is a good idea in Swedish Swimming pools. Why? Because when there was a threat that was not apparent before that risked all female swimmers and the checking system in place (ie the "groping guards") was certainly a step in the right direction and acknowledging the problem but ultimately due to its limitations was ineffective and likely to have too little effect on the overall threat, the next step was isolation until better checking system could be put in place to reduce the threat to a level were the threat and risk were monumentally diminished. That is the adoption of gender segregation.

I always DID think that the idea is a sound one. It is a LOT better than not addressing it in a way that is both different and better than now, and reduces risk and danger. However it IS an idea. A concept. A thought. How could Donald bring this good idea to life? In principle it would be easy enough but here is where the BIG problem I see. If I was a Radicalised Muslim and I knew I was not able to come in as a Muslim, I would say to the immigration officials that I was an Atheist or a Christian. If my country was on a no immigration zone, I would travel to a country that was not on the no immigration zone and come through from there.

So what might have seemed as safe and as thorough as the gender segregated swimming times now looks more like as effective as the groping guards.

You think this is backtracking? Not at all. It always was that case. In comparison to not doing anything or increasing immigration numbers, without having the better safeguards, it is way better.
Doing nothing = Obama
Increasing Muslim immigration = Hillary
Placing a freeze on Muslim immigration until a better method of vetting can be done = Trump

And I reiterate: the border controls would not have stopped Orlando. What's your plan?

I've told you this already. Even spelling out that this is not "my plan". But then you know this already.

You still are not making your point.

[MLA]

[odeon]

Al,

Yes, I live in Sweden and I'm telling you again that you got it wrong. Don't equate what a group of people supposedly did in Kalmar with the whole country, because that's just silly. But then again, most of what you're on about in this thread is silly.

Plus, you still haven't backed up any your shit: how would denying Muslims entry into the US stop anything? Where is your proof that any of it would actually change anything? Are you of the opinion that the US should now ignore those pesky treaties they signed? Etc.

Plus, how would you solve the problems with the nationals who go on shooting sprees? And why do you think so many (a majority) actually support Obama's gun control measures?

Take your time.

[Al Swearegen]

Al,

Yes, I live in Sweden and I'm telling you again that you got it wrong. Don't equate what a group of people supposedly did in Kalmar with the whole country, because that's just silly. But then again, most of what you're on about in this thread is silly.

Plus, you still haven't backed up any your shit: how would denying Muslims entry into the US stop anything? Where is your proof that any of it would actually change anything? Are you of the opinion that the US should now ignore those pesky treaties they signed? Etc.

Plus, how would you solve the problems with the nationals who go on shooting sprees? And why do you think so many (a majority) actually support Obama's gun control measures?

Take your time.

I don't need to take my time, thanks for the suggestion though. So have you lied here as well? It's put an interesting spin on things. Looking for lies from Odeon.

Sorry you don't get to wave away either women and children being raped at higher rates than most of the world nor women and children being raped in swimming pools in your country at the rates they are reported from a variety of international sources (and let's be clear, the source you showed me to evidence a rebuke of my argument showied a higher incident rate per 100 000 to US in fact it was about 150% higher to the FBI states in US).

Is the US able to legally secure it's borders and does the rights given the immigrants or refugees trump the rights of a country's citizens or their sovereignty or right to protect themselves? No. That is why Villawood detention Centre is a thing in Australia

If the FBI was able to spend more time assessing national risk (given they have over 900 national active cases in this regard) and upgrading their vetting systems to differentiate the Muslims that would be beneficial to America compared to radicalised Muslims who wish to present a real danger and do not value America, then I think that they would have a better chance to not interview Mateen twice and come away with nothing. It's no point if months later they say "Oh we probably should have investigated a bit more. Perhaps we were not comprehensive enough"

[odeon]

You should have taken your time because this is just sad. You're now actively confusing things but still lack a logical argument of any kind. I did chuckle at this last bit, though:

If the FBI was able to spend more time assessing national risk (given they have over 900 national active cases in this regard) and upgrading their vetting systems to differentiate the Muslims that would be beneficial to America compared to radicalised Muslims who wish to present a real danger and do not value America, then I think that they would have a better chance to not interview Mateen twice and come away with nothing. It's no point if months later they say "Oh we probably should have investigated a bit more. Perhaps we were not comprehensive enough"

This is actually hilarious. Thanks for the laugh.

[rock hound]

My disgust and stuff with humanity grows every day!

[FourAceDeal]

You should have taken your time because this is just sad. You're now actively confusing things but still lack a logical argument of any kind. I did chuckle at this last bit, though:

If the FBI was able to spend more time assessing national risk (given they have over 900 national active cases in this regard) and upgrading their vetting systems to differentiate the Muslims that would be beneficial to America compared to radicalised Muslims who wish to present a real danger and do not value America, then I think that they would have a better chance to not interview Mateen twice and come away with nothing. It's no point if months later they say "Oh we probably should have investigated a bit more. Perhaps we were not comprehensive enough"

This is actually hilarious. Thanks for the laugh.

I snorted tea out of my nose.

[DirtDawg]

This is how I see it.
Sweden's population is a little over 9 million.
France is a little over 64 million.

The US has an estimated population of 323 million as of 2016.

Actually for the size of the country, the diversity, and the population, I think it could be a lot worse.

Russia (over 143 million, and a lot bigger) has stricter gun laws, and double the murder rate.

Mexico has passed some very strict gun laws over the years, hasn't helped them much either. They still beat us by a mile.

Some might say well you can expect that...damn crazy Russians...crazy Mexicans.

But the US is full of crazy Russians, Mexicans, Hungarians, Africans, Irish, Italians, Jamaicans, Chinese, Germans, etc.

Find another country as diverse and as big as this one...pack them all in and tell them to "play nice" and see how it goes.

Honestly I feel Orlando shouldn't have happened. This guy was reported by the owner of the gun shop, this guy was investigated prior by them (twice)...I think someone was asleep at the wheel and not doing their job.

We do not need more gun laws, BUT we DO need to boldly enforce the ones already on the books.

This IS the standard NRA talking point, but actually believing it puts you in the very small minority.  77% of Americans are supportive of new gun laws right now.  Universal background checks and not allowing sales to people on a terrorist watchlist.

Now see, you got me wrong again.

I do think we should have THOSE particular laws on the books.

I mainly wanted to state before that this guy could have been stopped with existing laws.

I also feel that that 77% number you mentioned will likely go down after most of this newness wears off this latest attack.

[rock hound]

   The simplistic stupidity astounds me and makes me weep for humanity!   How many more of these massacres do we have to endure or survive???   If my daughter or wife was killed by this. I would make it my life's work to hunt down and KILL wayne lapierre for his complicity.