Image of savage beheader here;



Video of attacker here justifying his actions;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keZFXWm3XC8&oref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DkeZFXWm3XC8&has_verified=1

The media keeps calling this "terrorism", when it's actually "jihad".

I recommend reading a book called:

The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion (2006) by Robert Spencer.

I wonder what would happen if that Muslim tries to do the same in Texas...

I wonder what would happen if that Muslim tries to do the same in Texas...

The odds are good he would have been killed in the attempt here because, unlike Britain, we don't have gun control, so those who wish to be able to defend themselves are free to do so.

Quote from: DoubtingThomas

I wonder what would happen if that Muslim tries to do the same in Texas...

The odds are good he would have been killed in the attempt here because, unlike Britain, we don't have gun control, so those who wish to be able to defend themselves are free to do so.

I have a friend from Texas.  I asked him if there are any bank robberies
there.  He said that nobody would dare try to rob a bank in Texas,
because half the people in the lobby are packing heat.  It would be
about as sure as ѕυιcιdє to even try. He says you walk down the
street and never know who has a gun and who doesn't, but some
wear sidearms so you know that much.  

When guns are a part of everyday life, they cease to be the terror
and stigma that they would become under imposition of gun control.  

Yeah, I was going to say, that's hyperbole.

We still have crime here. It's just less likely to happen in certain places and the odds of someone intervening are a lot better.

Speaking of banks, ours was robbed not too long ago. Interestingly, almost all the workers there are women.

Women in general are rarely armed, even down here.

Quote from: DoubtingThomas

I wonder what would happen if that Muslim tries to do the same in Texas...

Much the same as happened in Britain, except in this case only one innocent was killed or hurt.

Give that this soldier's attackers ran him over with a car first, he was hardly in a fit state to shoot them.  They then proceeded to hack him up with machetes and a butcher's axe.  They had an old revolver but it was poorly maintained and backfired blowing one of their thumbs off.  Thanks to gun control, that was all a couple of negro Islamonutters could afford to get their hands on.  The armed police unit then shot them without injuring anyone else because cops are trained to deal with these situations.

In a crowded street with people in every direction how desirable would it be for every armed Londoner, or Texan, to start shooting at people from a distance, even if they could judge the chaotic situation?  You could not get to point blank range since in Texas the criminals would be well armed and handguns at longer range are not very accurate.  Guns are cheap and available in Texas so every punk can afford to arm themselves.

You'd very likely therefore have stray bullets missing the target and flying towards buildings and into the crowd on the far side of the street.  So, realistically this was a situation which, if it happened in Texas, would PROBABLY end up with more dead and injured people not less.  Only ONE victim died after all and it is difficult to see how he would have been saved if exactly the same scenario played out in Texas.

Nidal Malik Hasan killed 13 and injured another 30 in Foot Hood Army barracks.  He was shooting people trained to use weapons and they took a while to bring him down.

Even in this case, the police arrived 20 minutes after the fact. So typical. They could have killed a lot of people in that time if they wanted to.

Ggreg, contrary to what people believe, over here you can't just walk into a store and buy a gun off the shelf and take it home. Everyone who purchases a firearm has to undergo an FBI background check and submit their personal information to the store's register. You can't sell a firearm to a convicted felon.

These people who commit crimes don't buy their guns at Outdoor World or Joe's Gunshop. They get them from the same place they get their drugs - back alley dealers who also sell stolen weapons. Gun control laws have no effect on the availability of weapons to lawbreakers. It's a totally different market and a totally different supply line. You couldn't purchase a gun in Mexico, yet there's weapons galore there, including explosives a regular person couldn't buy here.

In the case of Nidal Hasan the reason he wasn't taken down the moment he fired was because nobody present had a gun. Army personnel aren't permitted to carry on base like you imagine. Whatever weapons they have there they are only permitted to wield during training, otherwise they are kept under lock and key. It's stupid, but it's true.


As for the likelihood of a person responding to a crime in progress, misfiring, and injuring or killing a bystander... of all the cases I've heard of in all my years, I can't recall such a case. It simply doesn't happen. People who commit crimes are typically cowards looking for an easy isolated target or job. They don't want to take the chance of getting shot and killed. That's why most often criminals will stand down or run if a responding individual draws a handgun. And that's what generally happens in real life (not on the news). I can affirm that because that's what would happen and still happens in my old part of town.