My heart's truly broken for all those innocent people that were killed.

I'm sad that no one thought it worthwhile to bring up. I'm supposing since the man to commit the deadliest mass shooting in the US wasn't a Muslim or an Islamic sympathizer.

But events like this are a reminder to me that we can go at any time, at even the most random moments, and that not only is life precious, but that our belief in the Hereafter should be of the utmost importance for us.

Also, how do we stop sick maniacs like these (including the sick maniacs who do the very same thing but pretend it's for religion they do it)? It's not just gun laws. We need to do more. But what?

Magister would it be fair of me to say perhaps you thought to raise it up only because it WASN'T an Muslim or Islamic sympathiser..

I and other non Muslims here could cite several fairly recent attacks that were indeed carried out by people who were not psychotic but religiously motivated Muslims and Islamic sympathizers.

'The Eagles of death metal' concert, the Arianna Grande concert in Manchester that targeted young kids. The Barcelona attack that killed 13 and left hundreds terribly injured by mowing people down using a van just to name a recent few. None of these attacks were raised here by non Muslims to make any particular point. In fact what was the last terrorist atrocity caused by Muslims that you did cite here for discussion ? I cannot remember the last Islamic daily terrorist incident that was raised here because they are so commonplace. For it appears mass murder is only a discussion point on here when it's been committed by a 'normal' psycho unaffiliated with islam and is raised as a means to place Ilmic terrorism as no different when as I said just on the other thread here you have imams who can openly a call for the genocide of America and Europe from Islam's third holiest site unimpeded and free to continue about his ways... If your asking how can we stop the atrocities perhaps it's time for the 'ummah' to at least do its part in aknowledging what such speeches themselves inspire people to do. But that's never going to happen because within the Ummah there is either support or plain indifference to such rhetoric.

People like the Vegas shooter haven't been incentivised by hate mongers promising rewards in the next life for their 'bravery'. They simply decide within their own head that people will die by their hand due to their own phsychotic warped view of the world.

Edited by Damo808 - 04 October 2017 at 9:56am

They're one and the same in my book (and in the books of other experts as well).

It's intellectually lazy to just sum up motivations to something as trivial as religion.

Anyway, you're set in your ways, so not expecting to see you budge in any manner.

There's still a legitimate need for guns.

However, I do think that the types of guns that we have legal are a bit too excessive.

Whatever happened to muskets and those one-shot-forever-to-reload guns that our founding fathers used?

I've been in a situation where I wished I had a gun, not that I would have known how to use it.

I was a high school teacher for many years.The school was infested with drug dealers, many of whom were not even students at the school, but we had no security, because that might make us look like we needed security, if you get the point.

I received many death threats, including bullets left on my desk by unknown parties.

My biggest fear was walking into one of their drug deals. Sometimes I was warned. "If you come in here I'll kill you," from a boys' bathroom I was guarding from the outside, per instructions.

I knew many of the kids had guns in their cars because they talked about it.

I retired shortly before Columbine, but it came as no surprise to me.

I think I can agree with a revolver for every law-abiding citizen.

Guns are necessary for many people. For people like you, NB, maybe not. But owning firearms is part of the US Constitution and it's our right. The Constitution doesn't even say that people could have it if they "need" to have it - the right isn't based on need. Some people just love guns. They have gun clubs, gun magazines, gunsmith courses you can take online or in the mail or at a local community college, you can buy customized guns, gun stands and displays, and so much more. You can buy guns just for the heck of it - that's the beauty of being an American. But the downside to that is that as technology advances, guns become far more deadly and far less controllable.

I don't mind rifles and revolvers - that should be a reasonable limit on firearms while still leaving that right for all American citizens (and only American citizens).

NB, the Constitution is saying that the necessity is in the militia, not in the right itself to bear arms.



The Constitution did not use language that would lead us to believe that only "certain types" of arms were our God-given rights.

However, I agree in that these are not directed by God, and that modifications can and should be made to this even further so that the amendment becomes more practical and realistic than it now is.

I really like the idea of slow-shooting rifles (for hunting game or sports), and revolvers (for self-defense, security purposes). I just wish the rest of the country can get on board with this.