It looks like his face is on the back of his head.

nekom: GAT_00: It's happened more than a few times since 9/11. Real Americans wanting to kill some scary brown people, and they're all the same. Fox says so.

In the days right after 9/11 I seem to recall someone being mistaken for a Muslim and beaten to death, and if memory serves me he was either a Sikh or of some other turban-wearing faith or at least `brown looking'. I'm not saying it would have been in any way right and proper had the victim actually been Muslim, but it does add another layer of idiocy to the crime.

No one in this country should have to apologize for `looking different' than the majority.

...except Juggalos.

SRD: HotIgneous Intruder: KellyX: So how exactly would making them illegal stop criminals that use full-auto, not that many do anyhow.

Teevee criminals use full auto all the time!

But seriously, high-rate-of-fire weapons and high-cap mags need to be more controlled.
Would you rather be shot at by a guy with an AR-15 and a 100-round mag or a guy with a bolt action weapon with a six-round mag? High fire rates and high cap mags only increase a shooter's ability to kill and serve no other purpose.

Ok lets put this in perspective.

8000 people die a year in the USA from firearme homicide. That includes self defense of those 8000 that die 350 people are killed by rifles the ones you suggest banning most of those are hunting rifles that most likely are the ones you say should be allowed. So you want to ban the weapon least used in a crime.

Knives are used to kill in the usa about 1800 people a year far more than the weapons you want to ban. So why ban something that isnt much of a issue?

And my normal post of some of my weapons for people to realize just because you own weapons does not make one a killer. Over ten years of owning 0 illegal uses



[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh3.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh4.googleusercontent.com image 384x512]
[lh4.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 850x479]
[lh3.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 604x453]



COME AT ME, BRO!!

what_now: You know, he could actually have been going for Sikhs. Stupid farking racists often spread their stupid farking racism around.

Judging from the dim look in his eyes that says, "Did I eat paint last night?" I'd say he confused the two.

oldernell: I notice this is being referred to as a mass killing. The nra must have a rule that it has to be 10 or more killed to be considered a mass murder, and that an assault weapon must be used.

Christian media doesnt know what to call a Sikh religious service so they went with what they know.

SRD:
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh3.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh4.googleusercontent.com image 384x512]
[lh4.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 850x479]
[lh3.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 604x453]


Sorry about your penis.

paygun: RedEyedWings: People in Europe still stab and beat one another to death with saddening regularity, but how often do you hear about someone walking into a movie theatre or temple and knifing 25-50 people?

That kid in China killed more people with a knife than this guy did with a pistol.

Then apparently guns are unnecessary. I'm surprised that our military bothers with guns at all. They could get by with spearpoints and atlatls.

Mr. Coffee Nerves: So, if this is accurate, a guy who is so asstardedly brain-dead he couldn't even correctly identify the group he was so intent on hating considered himself "supreme?"

Personally, I blame the teachers unions for not teaching him the difference between Muslim and Sikh.

From this thread, I can see this guy was obviously an Obama plant, part of Obama's sinister plot to seize our guns after the election.

Buy ammo. Buy lots of ammo.

Mrtraveler01: SRD: HotIgneous Intruder: KellyX: So how exactly would making them illegal stop criminals that use full-auto, not that many do anyhow.

Teevee criminals use full auto all the time!

But seriously, high-rate-of-fire weapons and high-cap mags need to be more controlled.
Would you rather be shot at by a guy with an AR-15 and a 100-round mag or a guy with a bolt action weapon with a six-round mag? High fire rates and high cap mags only increase a shooter's ability to kill and serve no other purpose.

Ok lets put this in perspective.

8000 people die a year in the USA from firearme homicide. That includes self defense of those 8000 that die 350 people are killed by rifles the ones you suggest banning most of those are hunting rifles that most likely are the ones you say should be allowed. So you want to ban the weapon least used in a crime.

Knives are used to kill in the usa about 1800 people a year far more than the weapons you want to ban. So why ban something that isnt much of a issue?

And my normal post of some of my weapons for people to realize just because you own weapons does not make one a killer. Over ten years of owning 0 illegal uses



[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh3.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh4.googleusercontent.com image 384x512]
[lh4.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 850x479]
[lh3.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 604x453]

Honest question here:

A. How much did all of that cost.
B. How often do you use any of that.

C. And how tiny is your dick?

LlamaGirl: Well Rush is off his frogdamn rocker already....

How can you tell?

doyner: Looks white supremist-ey to me...
[localtvwiti.files.wordpress.com image 299x395]

If only those peaceful church-going patrons had all been armed with AK-47s and anti-personnel mines, this tragedy could have been averted!

/And possibly laser-guided minigun turrets

Lives in WI. Coworker was going on today about signing up for gun safety course and get a concealed carry license for him and his wife. All while he's saying the gov'ment will take our guns any day now. The thing is he's serious about this. He's the typical idiot who believes whatever is on Fox News or conspiracy website to be 100% true. He cant walk and talk at the same time, but he thinks he can handle a gun? I wouldn't trust the moron with a pair of safety scissors let alone a gun. But the thing is I hope he gets one. Because he will screw up and probably shoot himself. I could use a good laugh.

Sikhs are FAR from peaceful people. The evidence lies in the games children play. Just look:

FlashHarry: Vodka Zombie: And furries?

furry juggalos? polyester costumes stained with faygo?

TXEric: However... be careful, because the rabid anti-gunners, as you can tell from these threads, just might grope your package when they find out you like the mean, nasty guns.

No.
The TSA -- a neocon production through and through -- already grope everyone's crotches.
Thanks neocons!

Your Zionist Leader: kaseyfarksdaladies: miss diminutive: Wade Michael Page

Can we just lock up everyone with three names right now and save ourselves the trouble?

I'm fine with locking up any white with a bald head and/or goatee.

Hey wait a second, I'm white and bald. It was either shave my head or have Dracula's hairline.

OK. Take this simple test to find your fate. Who would you look more like with hair:


Locked up


Freedom but I've gotta pinch your cheeks whenever I see ya


Get back in your windowless van, ya creepy bastard!

TXEric:
If some citizen feels guns are to be forbidden, the first order of business is go get trained on gun handling.
Find out what/how guns really do what they do.
Then voice an opinion.

They can't. They're too afraid their dicks will shrink.

So you're saying it's like Anaconda Malt Liquor for white folk?

Karma Curmudgeon: Sorry about your penis.

I've never understood why libs have such fascinations with conservatives' penises.

Amos Quito: /Would add "God", but apparently he moved and left no forwarding address

Have to send Dog, the bounty hunter, after this god character.
If he's responsible for this mess, he needs to go upstate.

SRD: HotIgneous Intruder: KellyX: So how exactly would making them illegal stop criminals that use full-auto, not that many do anyhow.

Teevee criminals use full auto all the time!

But seriously, high-rate-of-fire weapons and high-cap mags need to be more controlled.
Would you rather be shot at by a guy with an AR-15 and a 100-round mag or a guy with a bolt action weapon with a six-round mag? High fire rates and high cap mags only increase a shooter's ability to kill and serve no other purpose.

Ok lets put this in perspective.

8000 people die a year in the USA from firearme homicide. That includes self defense of those 8000 that die 350 people are killed by rifles the ones you suggest banning most of those are hunting rifles that most likely are the ones you say should be allowed. So you want to ban the weapon least used in a crime.

Knives are used to kill in the usa about 1800 people a year far more than the weapons you want to ban. So why ban something that isnt much of a issue?

And my normal post of some of my weapons for people to realize just because you own weapons does not make one a killer. Over ten years of owning 0 illegal uses



[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh3.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh4.googleusercontent.com image 384x512]
[lh4.googleusercontent.com image 720x542]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 850x479]
[lh3.googleusercontent.com image 720x540]
[lh5.googleusercontent.com image 604x453]

I'm glad that you have the legal right to own every single firearm pictured. I still think it's absurdly excessive, the same as I think owning 50 copies of the same album is absurdly excessive. There's no legitimate need to have enough artillery to field a small militia. What the hell do you think is going to happen that would require that much weaponry? Do you just stand around and look at them all day, or charge admission to have other people stand around and look at them all day? Are they all antiques and thus not usable? Are they broken but you just like the way they look?

One or two handguns and maybe a hunting rifle if you live out in the sticks, okay. Enough guns to start your own armory? WTF for?

SRD: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 588x471]

I love when people say there is no reason i should own such guns yet it do. What does the reason matter? Also why are you more scared of a guy with 50 guns than a guy with 1? you cant use more than one gun at once you know that right.

The Muthaship: Has Fark given him a cute, catchy nickname yet?

I tried for Jerry Seinfeld, but it didn't catch yet.

Charles Martel: [4.bp.blogspot.com image 651x426]

I won't believe it until Brian Ross says it.

Yes, we can't forget that White Republicans are the real victim in this tragedy.

SRD (posts gun porn of semi-epicness)

Kee-rist, dude.

What, are you arming a small country against invasion? Setting up your own police force? Gearing up for the zombie invasion? Wow.

Angry Buddha: doyner: Looks white supremist-ey to me...
[localtvwiti.files.wordpress.com image 299x395]

He also looks like 50% of all the IT guys I've ever known.

If those Sikhs had had knives or something, they might have been able to defend themselves.

he could be Limbaugh jr.

Don't lollygag in here all day kids, George W. just set fire to a Mosque in Joplin!

Bloody William: While I want these things to stop and I think the Muslim-bashing right-wingers need to cool it to make these things less likely, I also think terrorism in all forms cannot be stopped with certainty. No violence can.

Let me give you a CSB parable. I have a cane. I don't use it often unless I sprain my ankle, but it's a cool cane, with a carbon fiber shaft and a machined aluminum head. When I walk through the city, I walk by hundreds of large glass windows every hour. There is nothing stopping me from swinging that cane into one of those windows and shattering it. I might be punished, my cane might be taken away, but that window will never be whole again. It will be replaced, but that glass was broken and nothing can put it back together.

How can you stop me from breaking that window? Put cops on every street corner ready to attack people who look like they might break windows? Unfeasible, and they probably couldn't stop me by the time I swung. Ban canes? I could use a stick, or a rock, or just punch the window and deal with the blood. Now people who have problems walking wouldn't be able to use canes in public and the window still isn't totally safe. There is no certain answer that is acceptable by our standards of morality and law. In the end, we just have to reduce the chances of people breaking windows to the best of our ability and accept that sometimes glass is going to crack. The alternative is far worse.



Well said.

After such events everyone always starts in with the "how do we make it so that there is no violence ever, society is going downhill, there were never murders before I was born" etc.

There are going to be X number of occurrences no matter what is done. I think that we have a pretty low incidence of such events already considering that there are lots of guns and lots of nutballs in this country who can very easily find a crowd of people.

I'm gonna reserve judgement until Brian Ross weighs in.

tmyk: [localtvwiti.files.wordpress.com image 299x395]

It looks like his face is on the back of his head.

I expected the shooter to be the governor of Wisconsin.

Zizzowop: When I think about people that all need to be armed to protect themselves from crazies I think of that scene from Predator 2 on the subway when everyone had a gun.

Predator 2 was set in Los Angeles. California concealed weapons permits are issued on a "may issue" basis and only wealthy and politically connected individuals are able to obtain them. As such, the scenes depicted in the movie were entirely unrealistic; because of the strict restriction upon carrying firearms, obviously no one in Los Angeles is armed.

In the wrong hands guns can be the vehicle for some rather horrific events. As some have mentioned the vehicle to the devastation could be a poisoned water supply, motor vehicle, bombs, etc. Once we further regulate guns and lessen their impact another vehicle will surface as the number one mechanism for horrific events. Do we address that next?

The real issue here is the individual performing the horrific action. Take away guns and they will find another means. If we're going to trample on people's rights why not directly address the problem and not the symptom? Force everyone to be evaluated every 3 years by a team of trained professionals and have them identify the ones that pose threats. Those people could then be removed from society or put on a special watch list and required to regularly check in with an oversight agency. After all, we're only doing this for the greater good of society and the benefits of this minor inconvenience should clearly outweigh any erosion of personal freedom.

WTF Indeed: Mr. Coffee Nerves: So, if this is accurate, a guy who is so asstardedly brain-dead he couldn't even correctly identify the group he was so intent on hating considered himself "supreme?"

Personally, I blame the teachers unions for not teaching him the difference between Muslim and Sikh.

.this douchebag was a white supremacist essay.. I doubt the Aryan Brotherhood/RAHOWA 88 folks consider Sikhs best buddies and this was just an unfortunate case of mistaken identity/religion where the white power movement will now be filled with regrets and redemption!

I don;t understand why so many farkers think he may have had confused Sikhs with Muslims as if he made a terrible mistake because he genuinely had a lot of love for the local Hindus and Sikhs............(roll eyes)

Gunny Highway: JerseyTim: The SPLC thinks it was the same guy who was a guitarist in a white power hardcore band.

There are still white power hardcore bands? God damn it.

Man, you think at some point they'd update to white power screamo or dubstep, but the skinhead part might suffer. Then again, Hitler had a pretty emo haircut.

theolinc: their cooking smells like someones burning a muddy sack full of cat shiat

I realize it can be a bit of a departure from your local Cracker Barrel but you might want to get to a good Indian restaurant sometime.

Arkanaut: dittybopper: miss diminutive: Wade Michael Page

Can we just lock up everyone with three names right now and save ourselves the trouble?

Pretty much every one has three names. They commonly don't use them, even mass murderers and assassins, but the press generally does use all three names to differentiate "X Y Z" from all the other people named "X Z".

There are about 80,500 people with the last name "Page" in the US. Approximately .03% of US citizens are named "Wade", so we could expect that there would be at least 24 people in the US named "Wade Page". Adding that middle name would cut that confusion down to at most a couple people.

On the other hand, the media is still calling the Aurora "James Holmes", even though both the first and last names are fairly common. I've seen him referenced once as "James Egan Holmes", but that hasn't caught on.

I think it has more to do with having two first names. Egan is more of a last name.

Wade Michael Page
John Wayne Gacy
Billy Ray Cyrus

Would you rather be armed so the government can't just declare an absolute monarchy or other totalitarian style government, or be outright disarmed and allow the government to tell you what you can and can not do at the cost of your life for punishment?

Something to consider.

what_now: And finally, we take a look at our gun laws, and make some real and serious changes- nation wide- to what is an is not allowed.

Perhaps you could offer specific examples, rather than the vague statement of "real and serious changes" which could apply to any number of possible restrictions, whether reasonable or not.

GAT_00: Weaver95: GAT_00: Weaver95: GAT_00: Weaver95: GAT_00: Another mass shooting with a legal gun. Shocking.

obviously, we should pass more laws. or hey - how about tax cuts for the rich! both are equally effective in stopping deranged former veterans from going on a rampage with a gun.

Well since you don't like what it will take to stop innocent people from being killed, let's not do anything. Hell, let's celebrate these events! After all, how else can we know we're truly free?

humans kill other humans. that's just what we do. you cannot stop it no matter how many laws you pile up around us. in fact, trying to bury us in laws will only make more criminals out of otherwise peaceful and law abiding citizens. you will create more of the problem you are trying to solve.

Well then! Let's not even try to fix it. Clearly there isn't a problem here.

alrightie bright boy - lets here it. what's your grand plan from stopping humans from killing other humans. Keep in mind that your answer cannot violate the US constitution OR the bill of rights.

I love this bullshiat counter argument. Fix everything yourself, or don't you dare suggest there is anything wrong. You know what, if you're just going to stifle debate, you can go away. Nobody would miss you.

You have confused misrepresentation of Weaver95's request with a justification of your position. The two concepts, however, are not logically equivalent.

This tragedy could have been averted if the victims had been armed, like with a knife of some sort.

GAT_00: marius2: GAT_00: Another mass shooting with a legal gun. Shocking.

Clearly a sign that we need more guns!

/Don't take away the rights of citizens to defend themselves from citizens who used their rights to buy guns.
//AmIDoingThisRight?

Hey, those Sikhs got to experience true freedom. They got riddled with it. It's the American Way, just pointless mass shootings that we do absolutely nothing to prevent for no goddamn reason.

But if we didn't have our well regulated militias, how could we ever assert our rights before the king?

So, what do we name him? Maybe Chucky?

Just because this guy was a shell-shocked white supremacist, please don't jump to conclusions that this had any effect on his actions.

GAT_00: nekom: GAT_00: It's happened more than a few times since 9/11. Real Americans wanting to kill some scary brown people, and they're all the same. Fox says so.

In the days right after 9/11 I seem to recall someone being mistaken for a Muslim and beaten to death, and if memory serves me he was either a Sikh or of some other turban-wearing faith or at least `brown looking'. I'm not saying it would have been in any way right and proper had the victim actually been Muslim, but it does add another layer of idiocy to the crime.

No one in this country should have to apologize for `looking different' than the majority.

According to NPR this morning, a Sikh council spokesperson said there have been 1000 documented attacks of varying degrees on Sikhs since 9/11. That's everything from a simple quick physical altercation up to stuff like this.

See? This is why the world should fear America. We are an ignorant and ARMED population. Those two things never make for anything but trouble.

Gunny Highway: nekom: GAT_00: It's happened more than a few times since 9/11. Real Americans wanting to kill some scary brown people, and they're all the same. Fox says so.

In the days right after 9/11 I seem to recall someone being mistaken for a Muslim and beaten to death, and if memory serves me he was either a Sikh or of some other turban-wearing faith or at least `brown looking'. I'm not saying it would have been in any way right and proper had the victim actually been Muslim, but it does add another layer of idiocy to the crime.

No one in this country should have to apologize for `looking different' than the majority.

...except Juggalos.

And furries?

nekom: Well, color me unsurprised. The only thing I can't figure out is why he'd target Sikhs. Did he mistake them for Muslim or were they simply the nearest `foreign looking' types he could find?

It's happened more than a few times since 9/11. Real Americans wanting to kill some scary brown people, and they're all the same. Fox says so.

Godscrack: With a 9-11 tattoo.

Grew up in SM, and the Page's I knew had spiderweb tattoos on their elbows in high school. Not sure if this guy is from that family or not. But,the name does sound familiar.