California This Time

There’s been another mass shooting, this time in California. 14 dead at last count, two of the shooters dead and possibly one at large. It’s very unclear at this point what has happened (not that this has stopped the usual suspects for making political hay out of it). This does seem a bit more organized with multiple shooters in body armor.

I will post updates as events warrant.

Comments are closed.

  1. WVRSpence

    Via Drudge:

    “He was very quiet,” Reisinger, who worked for 11 years as an environmental inspector, said. “I would say hi and bye, but we never engaged him in conversation. He didn’t say much at all.”

    Thumb up 0

  2. Nobody

    CM seems unable to grasp that there is a difference between making an observation, and “making political hay”.  Ironically, our resident liberal-in-denial posted an article chock full of liberal politicians actually making political hay by calling for more gun control, but he skips all that to focus in on the last item, which is an example of observation, and not “making political hay”.

    Apparently, CM doesn’t even know what that idiom means.  Hint: It’s closely related to “never let a crisis go to waste”…..

    Thumb up 4

  3. AlexInCT

    My favorite dysfunctional moment comes from the coverage by the fucking LSM assholes. That idiot that shot up the Planned Paretnthood a few days ago? Defenitely a right wing extremist motherfucker and we should now ignore everything those videos that showed these fuckers dismembering unborn babies for money. This radicalized asshole with terror ties shoots up people and here is CNN at it – http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/03/us/san-bernardino-shooting/index.html - reporting:

    Fourteen died in the holiday party carnage and 21 more were wounded, according to Burguan. He said two police officers suffered injuries in the subsequent shootout.

    Authorities later found thousands more rounds of ammunition at the couple’s residence, 12 pipe bombs and hundreds of tools that “could be used to construct IEDs or pipe bombs,” the chief said.

    Burguan said “we still don’t have a motive,” but speculated that the couple may have been planning more carnage.

    What do you see that is wrong there? The police chief seriously seems to feel he can’t figure out the motive? Yeah, sure.. But the L.A. Times, also trying to avoid saying the obvious, does give it away here: http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-85215735/. Farook was a fervent muslim, traveled to Saudi Arabia, and we find out also filmed this Jihadi attack as you can see from non LSM sources here: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/12/police-san-bernardino-killers-were-wearing-gopro-cameras-during-massacre/

    Yeah, the motive us unclear my ass.

    Thumb up 0

  4. Hal_10000 *

    …during a campaign stop in Onawa, Iowa, Huckabee added that there were always two “common denominators” for mass murders in the country: “One: A mentally unstable person. Two: A gun-free zone. And those seem to be the common denominators.”

    Well, Huckabee can kiss my ass too.

    Yeah, this is looking increasingly like jihadism.  I don’t want to leap to that conclusion — Muslims can go psycho for no reason just like everyone else.  But bombs, guns, armor, recent trips abroad.  It’s starting to add up.  All we’re waiting for is a manifesto.

    Thumb up 0

  5. CM

    CM seems unable to grasp that there is a difference between making an observation, and “making political hay”.

    LOL, Riiiiiiight, Huckabee wasn’t making any sort of political statement there at all. Except he was.

    Ironically, our resident liberal-in-denial posted an article chock full of liberal politicians actually making political hay by calling for more gun control, but he skips all that to focus in on the last item, which is an example of observation, and not “making political hay”.

    No irony there at all, it was simply intended to show that “the usual suspects” shouldn’t just be assumed to be those on the left. But you go right ahead and misrepresent what I was doing…..

    It’s closely related to “never let a crisis go to waste”…..

    Which is exactly what Huckabee was doing.

    Thumb up 0

  6. Nobody

    LOL, Riiiiiiight, Huckabee wasn’t making any sort of political statement there at all. Except he was.

    Thanks for proving my point.  Political statement =/= making political hay.

    No irony there at all, it was simply intended to show that “the usual suspects” shouldn’t just be assumed to be those on the left.

    LOL, Riiiiight, you just keep on backpedaling and spinning.  You would at least have a leg to stand on if you had included Obama or at least Hillary in your little rant.

    But you didn’t.  Nope.  You pointed fingers exclusively at Republicans.  Tells us all we need to know.  Just like your liberalness.

    If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck…

    Which is exactly what Huckabee was doing.

    No, but you keep right on believing in your unicorns and fairies, bud.

    Thumb up 3

  7. CM

    Riiiiight, you just keep on backpedaling and spinning. 

    Having to explain to you what I did isn’t remotely “backpedaling” or “spinning”.

    You would at least have a leg to stand on if you had included Obama or at least Hillary in your little rant.

    Um, that wouldn’t have been even remotely consistent with my intention. Get a clue.

    Tells us all we need to know.

    I just told you what you needed to know, even though it should have been obvious to you. But here we go again, you’re determined to knee-jerk off in an entirely different direction, even though it doesn’t make sense.

    Just like your liberalness.

    Oh noes! The burn, the burn!

    No, but you keep right on believing in your unicorns and fairies, bud.

    Says the guy pathetically pretending to be someone different from before.

    Thumb up 0

  8. Nobody

    Having to explain to you what I did isn’t remotely “backpedaling” or “spinning”.

    There was no need to “explain”, so backpedal/spin it is.   Unless you can “explain” how a duck ain’t really a duck.

    Thumb up 1

  9. CM

    There was no need to “explain”

    There clearly was need, as for some reason you thought I was attempting to demonstrate that people from both the left and the right like to use tragic events to further their political beliefs. Actually I’m sure you knew full well that I was removing an unspoken qualifier from Hal’s statement, but you decided to try it on anyway.

    Thumb up 0

  10. Nobody

    for some reason you thought I was attempting to demonstrate that people from both the left and the right like to use tragic events to further their political beliefs

    I thought nothing of the kind.  You’re simply proving my point.

    Again.

     

    Thumb up 1

  11. CM

    Now you’re being obtuse. You’re not that stupid. My point was simple, and supported by that example. There is nothing more to it. That you cannot handle that it purely your issue.

    our resident liberal-in-denial

    I’ve posted here and on Moorewatch forums for well over a decade and have never hidden or misrepresented my opinions or thoughts. The obvious explanation for this current little game of yours is that you want me to identify with a group so you can claim some supposed semblance of legitimacy when you assign blame to what you see as an entire homogeneous group (because that’s the binary world you live in). You lump me in anyway, but presumably you want it to more ‘official’. Of course, as usual, you’ll only choose extreme examples or aspects of liberalism and pretend that it applies to all ‘liberals’, despite the fact that those examples/aspects are the ones I’m far less likely to agree with or support.

    Just in case you thought it wasn’t obvious.

    Thumb up 0

  12. Nobody

    You just don’t get it.  Maybe you’re incapable.  Thing is, by definition, Huckabee wasn’t taking advantage of anything.  He was stating objective facts.  Mass shootings do take place in gun-free zones, generally speaking.  And, by definition, someone who engages in mass shooting of innocent people is mentally unstable.  Those are simply facts.  If you want to dispute them, that’s one thing.  But stating facts simply ain’t “making hay”.

    “Making hay” means taking advantage of a situation to advance an agenda, which is what Democrats do every time there is a mass shooting.  They immediately call for more gun control.  Every time.  This, by definition, makes them the “usual suspects” who “make political hay”.  How can Republicans use a mass shooting to advance their agenda?  That agenda is, or should be, less regulation, less gun control, or at the very least, not increasing it.  How can they “take advantage” of a mass shooting to advance that goal?  They can’t.  The best they can do is state that the opposing agenda won’t help.  The best they can do is show actual data that fails to support the Democrats’ agenda.  It’s an uphill battle, and it can actually make them look bad, like they “don’t care” about the victims of mass shootings.  But they do care.  They want people to be able to protect themselves.  They want to give power back to the people.  Democrats want to do the opposite.  They want more power over people’s lives.  They want more gun control, more gun-free zones, more regulation, and they take advantage of tragedies to advance that agenda.

    Skipping all those Democrats who really are making hay in order to focus on the guy stating facts is what being obtuse really is.

    But, like I said, you may be utterly incapable of getting that.

     

    Thumb up 2

  13. AlexInCT

    Democrats want to do the opposite.  They want more power over people’s lives.  They want more gun control, more gun-free zones, more regulation, and they take advantage of tragedies to advance that agenda.

    CM sees this tyrannical shit the left does as a great thing, which is why he doesn’t feel these scumbags immediately resorting to talks of gun control and speech censorship qualifies as “making hay of the situation”, while anyone that points out the democrats are fascist scum, especially with any kind of facts, is in his twisted mind, making hay.

    The left is fucking despicable. Gun control only disarms law abiding citizens and makes it far easier for tyrannical government and terrorists to pull there shit off (see Europe in general). But talking about gun control instead of the idiotic idea of taking in refugees from terror enabling countries allows them to avoid talking about the miserable failure of Obama’s tenure. These fucking leftards are ghouls plain and simple. No tragedy will remain untapped to push their freedom stealing agendas.

    Thumb up 2

  14. CM

    I get it just fine. Huckabee was taking advantage of the situation to advance his political agenda, which is to staunchly maintain restrictions on gun control.  Which is presumably why Hal said “Huckabee can kiss my ass too”.

    Alex, I’ve never advocated for gun control in the US. The only people who will be impressed by your misrepresentation would be those who indulge in it themselves. Oh, I see….

    Thumb up 0

  15. CM

    “Mental illness” never created any idea, motivation or belief system. “Mental illness” refers to the way our minds can distort the ideas we get from the world, but the ideas still come from somewhere. Unless you believe everything occurs in a convenient vacuum. 

    Thumb up 0

  16. Nobody

    I get it just fine.

    Obviously not.

    Huckabee was taking advantage of the situation to advance his political agenda, which is to staunchly maintain restrictions on gun control.

    Nope.  He was stating facts.  In what he was quoted as saying, he didn’t call out for less gun control.  He didn’t call out for anything.  He simply stated facts.  That ain’t “taking advantage”.  That ain’t “making hay”.  Using tragedies to increase government, to seize more power, that is taking advantage and making hay.

    But do continue to misrepresent English words and idioms to suit your argument.  And then whine about being “misrepresented”.

    Thumb up 1

  17. CM

    Just so disingenuous Ico…I mean Nobody.

    He carefully chose his ‘facts’ to advance his position on guns, in the wake of another mass shooting. What if he’d tweeted “87% of children killed by guns in 23 of the world’s most developed  wealthiest countries were Americans”, or “Americans aged 15 to 24 are 43 time more likely to be killed by a gun than their counterparts in other wealthy, developed countries”, or “Among the 23 countries with a combined population of 854 million people, the US had roughly one-third of the people – and 80 percent of the gun death”. Would that simply have been stating ‘facts’? Or what about “I say this every time we have one of these mass shootings. This just doesn’t happen in other countries”?

    The “mentally unstable” argument is a scapegoat. The National Alliance on Mental Illness gave his state a D minus for mental health care during his time as governor. If he was POTUS would he work hard to improve mental health care, or would his policies actually make it worse? What is he doing about it now?

    Anyway, as John Oliver pointed out: “The aftermath of a mass shooting might actually be the worst time to talk about mental health. Because for the record, the vast majority of mentally ill people are nonviolent. And the vast majority of gun violence is committed by non-mentally ill people. In fact, mentally ill people are far likelier to be the victims of violence rather than the perpetrators. So the fact we tend to only discuss mental health in a mass shooting context is deeply misleading.”

    http://www.vox.com/2015/10/5/9453699/john-oliver-mental-health-last-week-tonight

    Thumb up 0

  18. CM

    Also, it’s clearly not “a fact” that mass murders always occur in a gun-free zone. Many have occurred in places that aren’t ‘gun-free’.

    Thumb up 0

  19. Nobody

    He carefully chose his ‘facts’ to advance his position on guns, in the wake of another mass shooting.

    That’s just assumption on your part.  And putting quotes around the word “facts” doesn’t make them any less factual.  And I can just as easily say that he stated these facts in the wake of another Democrat power grab attempt (“MORE GUN CONTROL NOW!”), which itself was in the wake of another mass shooting.

    What if…

    Right there, you lose.  Hypotheticals based on made-up numbers prove nothing, except how weak your case is.

    And the vast majority of gun violence is committed by non-mentally ill people.

    But we’re not talking about “the vast majority of gun violence”.  We’re talking about mass shootings.  Not the same thing.  So, nice non sequitur.

     

    Thumb up 0

  20. Nobody

    Since you will no doubt just repeat yourself again like the mindless drone you are, I’ll just say, yes, you are utterly incapable of getting it.

    “Making hay” means  doing something, in this case making more gun control laws.  Saying that the opposition’s agenda doesn’t work is not advancing an agenda.  It’s saying the opposing agenda doesn’t work.

    But again, you are mentally incapable of getting it.

    Kindly demonstrate that incapability one more time for us.  We’re waiting…….

    Thumb up 0

  21. Nobody

    Also, it’s clearly not “a fact” that mass murders always occur in a gun-free zone. Many have occurred in places that aren’t ‘gun-free’.

    No one is claiming that they “always” occur in gun free zones. But that is the tendency.  Nice misrepresentation, though, either on your part or on the part of whoever edited the article.

    Thumb up 0

  22. CM

    That’s just assumption on your part. 

    I’m only assuming that he chose ‘facts’ to support his political position on this issue? He could just have easily tweeted one of my other examples? They were just random ‘facts’ about shootings? Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

    And I can just as easily say that he stated these facts in the wake of another Democrat power grab attempt (“MORE GUN CONTROL NOW!”), which itself was in the wake of another mass shooting.

    How convenient. Doesn’t sound like it in this case. He was giving you all “a reminder” in the immediate wake of a mass shooting about which he knew nothing about.

    Right there, you lose.  Hypotheticals based on made-up numbers prove nothing, except how weak your case is.

    They are not made up numbers. You missed the point anyway, which was about choosing which ‘facts’ to advance in the wake of a shooting.

    But we’re not talking about “the vast majority of gun violence”.  We’re talking about mass shootings.  Not the same thing.  So, nice non sequitur.

    Non-mentally ill people are far more likely to be responsible for gun violence overall, but mentally-ill people are far more likely to be responsible for mass shooting. It completely switches over? How so?

    Thumb up 0

  23. CM

    Since you will no doubt just repeat yourself again like the mindless drone you are

    Right there, you lose.  Abuse proves nothing, except how weak your case is.

    I’ll just say, yes, you are utterly incapable of getting it.

    You’re just repeating yourself. Which doesn’t make it true.

    “Making hay” means  doing something,

    Not necessarily – it’s more accurate to say that it means taking advantage of opportunities while you can. In politics it doesn’t necessarily mean saying that something should be done – politicians quite often pick up on a comment they consider can get them plenty of mileage. You appear to be qualifying it to suit your purposes.

    e.g. “Republicans are trying to make hay out of comments Joe Biden made while campaigning in Ohio last week.”

    e.g. “Labor has been making hay with the family’s complicated and diverse business dealings.”

    http://grammarist.com/usage/make-hay/

    No one is claiming that they “always” occur in gun free zones.

    In all reports on this Huckabee said “always”.

    But again, you are mentally incapable of getting it.

    It appears that you are mentally incapable of coping with the fact that people can disagree with you and not be wrong.

    Thumb up 0

  24. CM

    None of your other examples apply to mass shootings, you dimwit.

    “I say this every time we have one of these mass shootings. This just doesn’t happen in other countries” doesn’t apply to mass shootings?

    Notwithstanding that, you missed the point again.

    Thumb up 0

  25. Nobody

     

    In all reports on this Huckabee said “always”.

    At least Salon had the decency to provide the complete, unedited quote:

    I think it’s a reminder to us in most every case that we’ve had in this country, two things have been common denominators, one a mentally unstable person. Two a gun free zone.

    He did NOT say “always”.  Anyone “reporting” that he did is lying to you.

    Thumb up 0

  26. CM

    Well picked up, and here he is saying it:

    Also, “in most every case” where the shooting doesn’t happen in a “gun-free zone” the shooter isn’t stopped by a citizen with a gun. Would that be equally factual?

    Thumb up 0