Should Omar Mateen have been legally allowed to buy a gun on June 10, 2016?

[MaxQue]

As I stated in another thread, I sure do wish "pro-life" Republicans would work as hard at preventing men from getting guns as they do at preventing women from getting abortions.

I love how the party of Jesus so adamantly defends their "God-given right" to have a gun, but any attempt at curtailing gun violence is "TYRANNY!"

And I sure wish the party that espouses the values of Liberalism and tolerance would be more willing to stand up to the regressive and violent religion that has claimed the lives tens of thousands of Americans since 9/11 and apply to them the same scrutiny that they do to Christianity, but I guess neither party is perfect.

This guy was born in the US. No Trumpist anti-Muslim immigration policy would have kept him out.

The FBI had investigated him and found sketchy things but nothing definitive.

The only way you could have prevented this from happening is with stricter gun laws.

And please don't tell me that the people in that club should have had guns too, because then you'd just have a bunch of people shooting at each other in a dark, crowded, smoky nightclub.

It's not just what happened last night. It's the last 8 years of looking the other way, of burying heads in the sand, and of refusing to condemn these people whose warped idealogy has led to the deaths of so many.  I think that could have made a difference.

So had this been a young white man from rural Indiana who went into a gay nightclub and killed 50 people because "Jesus doesn't like the queers," you'd be saying the same thing about Christianity, right?

Since that would be very out of character for an American Christian, I would certainly be surprised.  Rest assured though, I would condemn radical Christianity if it resulted in the deaths of 50 + gays (of which I am one).  Your hypothetical is just that, however, since it doesnt happen, and that is precisely my point.

It's also out of character for an American Muslim.

[MaxQue]

Many acts that are perfectly fitting the description of "domestic terrorism" are either overlooked, but described as simple murders/shootings.

If the Columbine shooting (any of recent school shootings) was being perpetrated by a Muslim, media would instantly call it a terrorist act, rather than "just" a "school shooting".

No, if the Columbine shooters had a political agenda with their shooting they would have been called terrorists. Terrorism requires a political motive, such as the Charleston church shooting, oklahoma city, orlando, etc.  (Oops, looks like 2 of those were done by white guys)

Stop moving goalposts to fit your agenda.

[MaxQue]

Many acts that are perfectly fitting the description of "domestic terrorism" are either overlooked, but described as simple murders/shootings.

If the Columbine shooting (any of recent school shootings) was being perpetrated by a Muslim, media would instantly call it a terrorist act, rather than "just" a "school shooting".

No, if the Columbine shooters had a political agenda with their shooting they would have been called terrorists. Terrorism requires a political motive, such as the Charleston church shooting, oklahoma city, orlando, etc.  (Oops, looks like 2 of those were done by white guys)

Stop moving goalposts to fit your agenda.

What goalposts??

About what "you" consider terrorism.

[MaxQue]

Many acts that are perfectly fitting the description of "domestic terrorism" are either overlooked, but described as simple murders/shootings.

If the Columbine shooting (any of recent school shootings) was being perpetrated by a Muslim, media would instantly call it a terrorist act, rather than "just" a "school shooting".

No, if the Columbine shooters had a political agenda with their shooting they would have been called terrorists. Terrorism requires a political motive, such as the Charleston church shooting, oklahoma city, orlando, etc.  (Oops, looks like 2 of those were done by white guys)

Stop moving goalposts to fit your agenda.

What goalposts??

About what "you" consider terrorism.

Those have always been my goalposts, dopey.

I'm not a dopey, fascist.

And your goalposts are biaised towards the conclusion you want, so they are totally unusable in debate.

[MaxQue]

Many acts that are perfectly fitting the description of "domestic terrorism" are either overlooked, but described as simple murders/shootings.

If the Columbine shooting (any of recent school shootings) was being perpetrated by a Muslim, media would instantly call it a terrorist act, rather than "just" a "school shooting".

No, if the Columbine shooters had a political agenda with their shooting they would have been called terrorists. Terrorism requires a political motive, such as the Charleston church shooting, oklahoma city, orlando, etc.  (Oops, looks like 2 of those were done by white guys)

Stop moving goalposts to fit your agenda.

What goalposts??

About what "you" consider terrorism.

While other dictionnaries only mention the terror part, not the political one. The very meaning of terrorism is subject to a debate, not everyone agrees with your view.