Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
They appear to have planned the attack, including their entry route, their escape route, the amount of time they could spend there before police arrived, and they even placed an apparent IED near the entry to hinder a law enforcement response. Anyway, what could an institution like that possibly keep on hand to stop two combat-armed people?
edited 2nd Dec '15 7:12:07 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"It almost sounds like the perpetrators were familiar with the building. So, former employees or perhaps a patient, or family of a patient then.
Out of curiosity, don't most state and federal buildings have security guards? or at the very least rent-a-cops?
edited 2nd Dec '15 7:16:16 PM by Skycobra51
Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.Texas is suing the federal government in order to halt a relocation of Syrian refugees to Dallas.
A suit that Texas will lose because the Supreme Court has already ruled indisputably on Federal authority over immigration.
@Skycobra: I don't know about federal buildings, but this is a private treatment facility that rents its conference rooms out for parties and conferences and stuff. There aren't that many private buildings that have security guards present, and certainly not armed ones. And anyway, what's a lone rent-a-cop going to do against military antipersonnel weaponry? Die honorably?
edited 2nd Dec '15 8:14:48 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Suffice it to say that I don't agree. There are many reasons why one might be deprived of the right to own a gun, and not all of them require a felony conviction.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Being on a watchlist can keep you from flying. Why shouldn't it keep you from buying a gun?
Self-devil's-advocate: watchlists are basically secret and it can be nigh-impossible for someone added unjustly or accidentally to get themselves removed. If that sort of thing is going to have more of an effect than "the FBI keeps tabs on you", then there needs to be a means for people to address it via the justice system.
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Adapting this to my point, if you want to criticize the constitutionality of something, it should be the watchlists themselves, not the denial of rights on the basis thereof.
![]()
Agreed. Regardless, the police, as of just now, seem to have not released any new information about the identities of the suspects or their motives, so we are left with pure speculation. The police wouldn't even tell us their race, presumably to ward off a witch hunt.
I'm going to guess that we'll have those details some time tomorrow, once all the preliminary investigative work comes in. If we don't, it can only be because the FBI is pursuing hot leads towards more suspects and doesn't want to tip anyone off.
edited 2nd Dec '15 8:29:52 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Double Post: We have the name of one of the suspects, and it's a name we had heard earlier: Syed Farook, a county health inspector. Farook is apparently the individual who abruptly left the party, and the home raided by police, where the chase began that ended in the deaths of two suspects, is affiliated with him.
It has not been revealed at this moment if Farook was one of the shooters, nor if he is the dead male suspect.
Please, please, let this not set off a witch hunt against anyone with a vaguely Arabic name.
edited 2nd Dec '15 9:15:25 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Thing is the denial of rights is what makes them doggy. A list of people the police are keeping an eye on (even if they've yet to commit any crimes) is fine, a list of people who are denied certain rights (like flying) even if they've yet to commit any crimes however is very questionable.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranHmm, valid point. Still, I don't regard firearm ownership as a fundamental right, the abridgment of which can create a Constitutional issue. And yes, I know that the Supreme Court disagrees. Doesn't mean I have to like it.
edited 2nd Dec '15 9:22:28 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Donald Trump is apparently declaring that CNN will have to pay him 5 million dollars or else he won't show up at the GOP debate.
To which I respond: Hooray!
Leviticus 19:34

It was at a developmental disability center, so does it matter what the party was fucking about? (Probably a Christmas party, since it's December.) They targeted a place that was filled with the vulnerable and people whose jobs it is to help the vulnerable. So I'm answering my own question and saying it fucking DOESN'T matter what the party was about and it's a stupid question to ask.