Just how Naive can a shooting victim be? Woman blames GUNS for Islamic Shooter

dmp

Senior Member
Joined
May 12, 2004
Messages
13,088
Reaction score
746
Points
48
Location
Enterprise, Alabama
WOW.
This is why we might just lose the war against Radical Islamic Terrorists. Here's a Radical Muslim, hell-bent on destroying Jews and FREE people who breaks into her office, and SHOOTS HER..

Yet...she's saying it's a GUN control issue. yikes.



Shooting Victim Hopes Attack Puts Gun Control On Nation's Radar

August 17, 2006

By Associated Press


SEATTLE - A woman wounded in last month's deadly shooting rampage at Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle offices says she hopes the attack helps the public and lawmakers see the need for tighter gun control laws.

Dayna Klein appeared at a news conference at a downtown Seattle hotel today.

Klein says how and why the murderer who invaded her workplace was able to legally acquire two semiautomatic weapons in Washington state is a disturbing mystery to her.

Klein says she met with former President Clinton last week while in New York, discussed both gun control and workplace safety with him and was encouraged by the conversation.

One woman died and five were injured in the July 28th shooting, when police say Naveed Afzal Haq stormed into the Jewish center and opened fire, declaring he was a Muslim angry at the United States' support of Israel.

Haq pleaded not guilty this week to aggravated first-degree murder, five counts of attempted murder and other charges. He faces either life in prison or the death penalty if convicted in the death of Pamela Waechter.
http://www.komotv.com/stories/44989.htm
 

GotZoom

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
5,719
Reaction score
367
Points
48
Location
Cordova, TN
I personally blame her mom and dad.

If they never had her, she wouldn't have been shot.
 

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
32,251
Reaction score
17,090
Points
1,905
Location
Arizona
Don't worry guys, the Liberals will come to the rescue and prevent any Constitutional rights from being taken away from Americans!
 

The ClayTaurus

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
7,062
Reaction score
333
Points
48
WOW.
This is why we might just lose the war against Radical Islamic Terrorists. Here's a Radical Muslim, hell-bent on destroying Jews and FREE people who breaks into her office, and SHOOTS HER..

Yet...she's saying it's a GUN control issue. yikes.
It IS a gun control issue. Radical Muslims shouldn't be allowed to control guns in this country. I think it's a valid concern, regardless of her other political motivations that it may be disguising.
 

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
13,399
Reaction score
1,706
Points
245
WOW.
This is why we might just lose the war against Radical Islamic Terrorists. Here's a Radical Muslim, hell-bent on destroying Jews and FREE people who breaks into her office, and SHOOTS HER..

Yet...she's saying it's a GUN control issue. yikes.
It's pretty obvious that jewish liberals have a bit of a mental disorder. :lalala:
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
WOW.
This is why we might just lose the war against Radical Islamic Terrorists. Here's a Radical Muslim, hell-bent on destroying Jews and FREE people who breaks into her office, and SHOOTS HER..

Yet...she's saying it's a GUN control issue. yikes.
That's not naive ... it's DUMB.
 

Hobbit

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
5,099
Reaction score
421
Points
48
Location
Near Atlanta, GA
It IS a gun control issue. Radical Muslims shouldn't be allowed to control guns in this country. I think it's a valid concern, regardless of her other political motivations that it may be disguising.
I'd give you 10-1 that the gun was obtained through an international gun runner. Even if the U.N. melted down every gun in the world, she would have been stabbed, or harpooned, or something. This is as much a gun control issue as 9/11 was a construction issue.
 

The ClayTaurus

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
7,062
Reaction score
333
Points
48
I'd give you 10-1 that the gun was obtained through an international gun runner. Even if the U.N. melted down every gun in the world, she would have been stabbed, or harpooned...
What is she, a whale? Besides, I didnt' say it was only a gun control issue, or even the majority of it a gun control issue. But part of it IS a gun control issue.
 

Hobbit

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
5,099
Reaction score
421
Points
48
Location
Near Atlanta, GA
What is she, a whale? Besides, I didnt' say it was only a gun control issue, or even the majority of it a gun control issue. But part of it IS a gun control issue.
Only if you mean by reigning in illegal weapons. They're trying to use this as a way to tear down the second ammendment, which has already suffered enough.
 

-Cp

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2004
Messages
2,911
Reaction score
360
Points
48
Location
Earth
What is she, a whale? Besides, I didnt' say it was only a gun control issue, or even the majority of it a gun control issue. But part of it IS a gun control issue.
You're a complete fool if you think that gun control - in the form of the goverment trying to legislate people getting guns - why? Because those who want to do harm to others WILL GET THEM ANYWAY from the gray-markets.

Ted Kenndy's Car has killed more people than my firearm has - does that mean we should have Car Control?
 

The ClayTaurus

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
7,062
Reaction score
333
Points
48
You're a complete fool if you think that gun control - in the form of the goverment trying to legislate people getting guns - why? Because those who want to do harm to others WILL GET THEM ANYWAY from the gray-markets.

Ted Kenndy's Car has killed more people than my firearm has - does that mean we should have Car Control?
Yes. People who kill others with cars shouldn't be allowed to drive. And terrorists shouldn't be allowed to have guns.

Quit finding more to my argument than there is. Terrorists should not be able to control guns, be they acquired legally or illegally. It is a gun CONTROL issue. Those who have a history of terrorist activity should have access to weaponry severely limited.

I don't have a problem with any turkey shooting deer skinning gun rack toting asshole owning whatever he wants. Good for you (you as in the asshole, and not you specifically).
 

The ClayTaurus

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
7,062
Reaction score
333
Points
48
Only if you mean by reigning in illegal weapons. They're trying to use this as a way to tear down the second ammendment, which has already suffered enough.
Everyone is always trying to use everything to do whatever it is they want. It doesn't change the fact that getting illegal weapons under control is a gun control issue. Either this was a legally owned gun, in which case someone is responsible for it falling into the hands of the terrorist, or it's an illegally owned gun and that needs to be taken care of through responsible and non-freedom-infringing gun control.

You all are too eager to assume I want to disarm you. I want to disarm terrorists.
 

Hobbit

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
5,099
Reaction score
421
Points
48
Location
Near Atlanta, GA
Everyone is always trying to use everything to do whatever it is they want. It doesn't change the fact that getting illegal weapons under control is a gun control issue. Either this was a legally owned gun, in which case someone is responsible for it falling into the hands of the terrorist, or it's an illegally owned gun and that needs to be taken care of through responsible and non-freedom-infringing gun control.

You all are too eager to assume I want to disarm you. I want to disarm terrorists.
I'm more interested in approaching from the angle of keeping them out of our country. We will never stop smuggling, and what this woman is suggesting will only make us MORE vulnerable by taking legal guns out of those who would use them in self-defense. As long as guns exist, there will be people who have them, legally or not. The thing at issue here is keeping terrorists form assaulting our citizens.
 

The ClayTaurus

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
7,062
Reaction score
333
Points
48
I'm more interested in approaching from the angle of keeping them out of our country. We will never stop smuggling, and what this woman is suggesting will only make us MORE vulnerable by taking legal guns out of those who would use them in self-defense. As long as guns exist, there will be people who have them, legally or not. The thing at issue here is keeping terrorists form assaulting our citizens.
You can make the exact same argument for keeping terrorists out the country.
 

Hobbit

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
5,099
Reaction score
421
Points
48
Location
Near Atlanta, GA
You can make the exact same argument for keeping terrorists out the country.
It's easier to transport things than people. Guns don't have to eat, breathe, pee, or sleep. They can be disassembled and transported piece by piece. People, on the other hand, get complicated. Once a gun has disappeared, it becomes almost impossible to find until it has been used. Terrorists, on the other hand, can be traced through phone calls, suspicious behavior, and other givaways. This guy apparantly passed the already draconian background checks required to get a gun in the first place. Let's discuss a few possible scenarios.

1 - He passed the background check because he's never exhibited any behavior that would disqualify him for gun ownership.

Solution - A very oppressive system that disqualifies so many people from gun ownership that it grossly violates the second ammendment, and it probably still won't stop a few occasional killing sprees started when a previously normal person snaps.

2 - He passed the background check because the system of checking backgrounds wasn't properly maintained.

Solution - Update the database, discipline those who were supposed to keep this guy off the approved list, and try to make sure it doesn't happen again.

3 - He used a fake I.D.

Solution - Harder to fake I.D.s, using such technology as holograms and microprinting.

Of the three ways this happened, only one is a gun control issue, and the only solution there is just to repeal the second ammendment and hope we can stop the illegal guns. The other two are not gun control problems, they're terrorist control problems.
 

The ClayTaurus

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
7,062
Reaction score
333
Points
48
It's easier to transport things than people. Guns don't have to eat, breathe, pee, or sleep. They can be disassembled and transported piece by piece. People, on the other hand, get complicated. Once a gun has disappeared, it becomes almost impossible to find until it has been used. Terrorists, on the other hand, can be traced through phone calls, suspicious behavior, and other givaways. This guy apparantly passed the already draconian background checks required to get a gun in the first place. Let's discuss a few possible scenarios.

1 - He passed the background check because he's never exhibited any behavior that would disqualify him for gun ownership.

Solution - A very oppressive system that disqualifies so many people from gun ownership that it grossly violates the second ammendment, and it probably still won't stop a few occasional killing sprees started when a previously normal person snaps.

2 - He passed the background check because the system of checking backgrounds wasn't properly maintained.

Solution - Update the database, discipline those who were supposed to keep this guy off the approved list, and try to make sure it doesn't happen again.

3 - He used a fake I.D.

Solution - Harder to fake I.D.s, using such technology as holograms and microprinting.

Of the three ways this happened, only one is a gun control issue, and the only solution there is just to repeal the second ammendment and hope we can stop the illegal guns. The other two are not gun control problems, they're terrorist control problems.
Of the three ways this happened? There's a million other ways this could have happened.

Besides; why do I have to pick between controlling terrorists getting into the country and controlling the illegal arms trade? Can't I pick both? That seems like a better idea to me.
 

Hobbit

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
5,099
Reaction score
421
Points
48
Location
Near Atlanta, GA
Of the three ways this happened? There's a million other ways this could have happened.

Besides; why do I have to pick between controlling terrorists getting into the country and controlling the illegal arms trade? Can't I pick both? That seems like a better idea to me.
Because there already IS a huge operation to shut down the illegal arms trade. Remember what the 'F' stands for in ATF? Whenever anyone says 'gun control,' all they ever mean is shrinking the conditions under which one can legally own a firearm. In fact, many gun control proponents think that these measures are the only way to cut down on illegal gun sales, as well. On the other hand, PC bullcrap keeps us from tracking terrorists. Then there's also the fundamental flaw with addressing crime as a function of what tool was used rather than what crime was committed. This isn't a 'gun crime.' It's an assault. Assaults have been happening since before we even started using tools. Some hippie gun control law isn't going to stop that.
 

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
It IS a gun control issue. Radical Muslims shouldn't be allowed to control guns in this country. I think it's a valid concern, regardless of her other political motivations that it may be disguising.
And John "Beaten by a Dead Man" Ashcroft, scotched attempts to regulate gun purchases by terrorists, known or not.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top