Assasination in Arizona

Since it seems this is going to be a topic that is worthy of it's own thread.

So far the federal judge is dead, as is a 9 year old child. The judge may have been the target as well remember, we don't know.

Scores wounded, evidence that it was a fully automatics weapon from the reports. Arizona allows open carry of many weapons, I'm not sure if that extends to automatic.

My buddy over at ninebullets.net says the target website is offline now, in fact it has been thoroughly 'scrubbed' from the Internet according to him.
 
Jared Lee Loughner. may be his name this story has a link to a YouTube channel that might be his.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
Opinion piece from March 25, 2010 about Palin's crosshairs.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...es-vio_b_512539.html
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
She is expected to recover as of now, although there are six dead... So far.

Is it right to lay this at the feet of the takebackthe20 website? It was taken down within hours of the attack. Friend of mine notes that it was 'scrubbed' from the Internet.

Thoughts on whether this can be considered a political attack incited by palin? Is it odd that the site could so thoroughly scrubbed so fast? Not just taken down but taken down like it never existed.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
I'm for gun rights. Reasonable ones. I'm also for reasonable control of firearms. A concealed-carry-without-permit law was recently enacted in Arizona. I don't call that reasonable.

This guy was legal until he pulled the trigger.

I'm not saying that's only because of that legislation, but it's easy to argue that concealed-carry-without-permit presents challenges to law enforcement they wouldn't have without it. Does law enforcement in Arizona need more challenges?

The people pushing concealed-carry-without-permit were even saying if more people were armed, it would prevent this sort of thing.

Didn't prevent this one. And the guy wasn't even shot. He was tackled.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
He killed a Federal Judge, so regardless of the status of the Congresswoman, your thread title remains accurate.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
From looking at this guy's attempts at syllogisms on YouTube, I wouldn't be surprised if he (like myself) had a terrible time with Gödel, Escher, Bach. I didn't feel like shooting anyone, but to this day, granted the opportunity, I'll kick Douglas Hofstadter in the nuts.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
Originally posted by Trogdor:
I'm for gun rights. Reasonable ones. I'm also for reasonable control of firearms. A concealed-carry-without-permit law was recently enacted in Arizona. I don't call that reasonable.

This guy was legal until he pulled the trigger.

I'm not saying that's only because of that legislation, but it's easy to argue that concealed-carry-without-permit presents challenges to law enforcement they wouldn't have without it. Does law enforcement in Arizona need more challenges?

The people pushing concealed-carry-without-permit were even saying if more people were armed, it would prevent this sort of thing.

Didn't prevent this one. And the guy wasn't even shot. He was tackled.


The problem about (any) legislation is that it's respected only by law abiding citizens. This guy would carry his gun concealed being it legal or illegal because he was decided to kill people. It would even prove non productive a law forbidding the possession of guns because once he decided to kill people he would go to illegal dealers/traffickers or would do something worse as building a bomb.

On the other hand, he was out of his mind. Put weird things in Youtube but it seems that his love for things like Mein Kumpf were not enough to draw attention of authorities... perhaps he failed in not using the word jihad or some derivative...
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
The problem about (any) legislation is that it's respected only by law abiding citizens.


So let's not have laws? Come on!

Even in Wyoming, they don't just have to apply, they have to attend a specific training regime and take a test. The process is designed to catch nutjobs. Felons can't get them and even most misdemeanors cause an exclusionary period. You have to be a Grade A, law-abiding citizen to concealed carry. You won't find CC guys using drugs, at all, or even drinking to excess. Public intoxication? You lose that card.

The CC law in Arizona wasn't even implemented to assure gun rights. It was a strategic wedge issue designed to elect TeaParty people.

Yes, he might have been able to do this anyway. But he would have been in violation of the law an hour sooner. So would cop killers. So would bank robbers. Overall, it increases the chances the person will be caught before they can do harm. If you're a cop and you see a hint of a gun showing on someone's person, you can stop them and ask for their permit (with your hand on the but of your own Glock... like they do).

In AZ, the TeaParty people claimed that it is everyone's right to carry a hidden firearm. Assassinations aren't the problem here. Local, State and Federal law officers deserve to expect to live until they retire, to see their kids graduate from school, etc.

Forget about assassinations, this is anti-cop legislation. Ask one. Ask a cop.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
Originally posted by Trogdor:
(...)

So let's not have laws? Come on!

(...)

Forget about assassinations, this is anti-cop legislation. Ask one. Ask a cop.


What I meant is that legislation, in this case would not help to avoid assassination. It's near impossible to avoid crazy people accomplishing their purposes only by means of bureaucratic actions. Police intelligence should be proactive about people who publicly express certain discourse (like liking Mein Kumpf).

I also understand that it's necessary to have some regulations about firearms ownership. Like proper registration and even the necessity of gun owners to submit themselves to sanity checks from time to time. But no law will work if it's not uniform around the country (meaning: no sense in controlling gun ownership in one state if you're able to cross frontier and buy it in the neighborhood).

About carry, one important thing is to determine where's even legal to carry a gun. No reason to allow people carrying guns in closed public areas (like banks, cinemas, shopping centers, schools, etc). What a civilian do with a gun in a shopping center? or cinema?

Regarding to the incidents in Arizona, given the presence of federal judge and other authorities, I guess it would be legal for police to scan attendants in order to determine if they're carrying or not. I guess that under the "patriotic act" it would even be possible to arrest them for further interrogation.

Just a final question: since it happened in Arizona, if the guy was not Loughner and fond of TP theories but someone like Chavez, Rodriguez, Sanchez or other Latin family name, would he been able to kill seven people before being hold (not by police but by someone in the crowd)?
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
What I meant is that legislation, in this case would not help to avoid assassination.


Then I'm sorry. For the most part, you're right about that.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
They scrubbed the PalinPAC site, but forgot to scrub her facebook page. She (well, probably not Palin herself) is also trying to delete her tweets, not realising they've already been saved for posterity.
Palin mouthpiece Rachel Mansour claims the targets were "cross-hairs like you’d see on maps".
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
Now people are looking for maps that have cross-hairs on them. None yet found.

There's some satellite-imaging alignment marks that look something like that, I guess.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
Why do we have to have a license to operate a motor vehicle?

All comes down to that.

If you take the written portion of your drivers test and you write things about everyone being illiterate and draw pictures of your new idea for coinage, you won't get a license.

When an officer checks your license, he or she can be assured you didn't do that. No license? They take your car.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
Originally posted by Trogdor:
Why do we have to have a license to operate a motor vehicle?

All comes down to that.

If you take the written portion of your drivers test and you write things about everyone being illiterate and draw pictures of your new idea for coinage, you won't get a license.

When an officer checks your license, he or she can be assured you didn't do that. No license? They take your car.


That part is a fraction of what I call "sanity check".

But a sanity check goes further: evaluation by psychiatrist and psychologist in order to see if one is stable/sane enough to own a firearm. No license for ex-cons, no license for people being criminally prosecuted, etc. If guy screws shortly after being evaluated, doctors, psychologists and other professionals on evaluation crew get charged for letting a wacko having a gun.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
But a sanity check goes further: evaluation by psychiatrist and psychologist in order to see if one is stable/sane enough to own a firearm. No license for ex-cons, no license for people being criminally prosecuted, etc. If guy screws shortly after being evaluated, doctors, psychologists and other professionals on evaluation crew get charged for letting a wacko having a gun.



Now we're speaking the same language. That's where we need to get, right there. Some states are moving in the opposite direction. Arizona moved nearly all the way in the opposite direction. Only way they could go further is start giving Glocks to (white) citizens. I assure you there are people who are thinking of proposing that.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
Wasn't Loughner rejected by the Army? That's a pretty fucking big red flag right there. Seems to me it says "He shouldn't even be allowed to use a firearm in a controlled environment, under strict supervision."
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink


Last month Pima County Republicans held a target-shooting event in support of Giffords' Tea Party opponent.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
Tweeted by Mike Moore:

quote:
If a Detroit Muslim put a map on the web w/crosshairs on 20 pols, then 1 of them got shot, where would he b sitting right now? Just asking.



An excellent question.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
Originally posted by Gromit:
Last month Pima County Republicans held a target-shooting event in support of Giffords' Tea Party opponent.


They're Americans and don't do dates properly, so it was in June, but the point still stands.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
Assassination in Arizona is taking - more and more - the colors of a terrorist act.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
Is it just me, or is this what chaos looks like?

Why do we need governance again?
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
One thing I really don't understand. As I read from today's newspaper ("Folha de São Paulo") the murder arrived the place handling a gun (meaning: the gun was at his hand & not in a holster), asked by Miss Giffords and was pointed the end of a line. In short, he entered in a line to commit assassination, handling a gun and nobody did anything before he unload it...

Isn't this a screwed up world????
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
I was just stunned to find out that there was no security at Giffords' event. After the windows in her office were smashed after the health care reform passed, and certainly being aware of how many people in the State feel about her and her politics, it was stupid of her to have such an open event.

That being said, how sad is it that it's her, not her active duty military husband, recovering in the hospital from a gunshot?

When I worked for the State of Arizona, Giffords came to our office (when she was still a State representative, not yet in Congress) and gave a talk. She seemed to be a genuinely nice person. She didn't talk in sound bites, or encourage us to put her political opponents in our crosshairs. She seemed reasonable, intelligent, articulate, and sincere. Whatever her faults as a person or a politician, she didn't deserve to be shot in the head by some whackjob.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
I was just stunned to find out that there was no security at Giffords' event. After the windows in her office were smashed


Getting bodyguards after some smashed windows seems a little out of proportion.

Of course, in restrospect, she needed security.

But I don't think it would have been sane to assume that a bullet in the head was the next logical step after broken windows.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
Reasonable people wouldn't think so, no. But apparently someone did. If I had been in her place I would have at least had one or two people on the lookout for trouble--not that I'd think of getting shot, but certainly would have expected hecklers and troublemakers.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
Why do we need governance again?
We don't need governance; governance needs us.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
Originally posted by ArkanGL:
quote:
I was just stunned to find out that there was no security at Giffords' event. After the windows in her office were smashed


Getting bodyguards after some smashed windows seems a little out of proportion.

Of course, in restrospect, she needed security.

But I don't think it would have been sane to assume that a bullet in the head was the next logical step after broken windows.


In a capitalist society, property damage is considered an act of violence, and as such should very well have served as a warning that she was being targeted.

Because she was.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
Is it odd that the site could so thoroughly scrubbed so fast? Not just taken down but taken down like it never existed.


It's notable. At least someone had the foresight to make a copy of it. Or anyway, one page of it. Google cache still shows the text from the page, but there's no formatting or images. Waybackmachine has no record of it. I think the political right's efforts to disassociate themselves with this tragedy will be just as interesting as the investigation of the event itself.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
Originally posted by BIOH4Z4RD:
(...)
It's notable. At least someone had the foresight to make a copy of it. Or anyway, one page of it. Google cache still shows the text from the page, but there's no formatting or images. Waybackmachine has no record of it. I think the political right's efforts to disassociate themselves with this tragedy will be just as interesting as the investigation of the event itself.


This is the kind of event with power enough to annihilate (in the political sense) extreme right plans for forthcoming times.

It can be compared to incidents involving KKK in the beginning of the 1960ies that resulted first in the elimination of segregation and later in the establishment of legislation ensuring equal rights for Caucasian and Afro-descendants.

Extreme right (just like extreme left) will always rely on ignorance, prejudice and hate to achieve their intents. The 2007-2009 crisis just gave them fuel enough to get out of the sewer where they were hiding. Just hope now they go back to the place they belong to...
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
In a capitalist society, property damage is considered an act of violence, and as such should very well have served as a warning that she was being targeted.


Dude, your country is severely fucked up.
But you already know that Smile
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
Getting bodyguards after some smashed windows seems a little out of proportion.

Of course, in restrospect, she needed security.


It is unlikely she could afford it. Not that congressmen are poor but in general they don't have gigantic incomes... $200k a year is the average and, although it sounds lame, that only covers an upper middle class lifestyle with two residences. Not a bad living but no way they are going to afford real security details on that kind of pay.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
Originally posted by ArkanGL:
quote:
In a capitalist society, property damage is considered an act of violence, and as such should very well have served as a warning that she was being targeted.


Dude, your country is severely fucked up.
But you already know that Smile


D00d, it ain't my country!

If it were, things would be very different.

And, Edit... How seriously would you take someone who said: "I only make 200 grand a year. Security is too expensive.

Even if she only hired a consultant to analyze her current detail, it'd have helped.

$200,000.00 a year puts her firmly in the upper class, and as such, she could have afforded decent security if she weren't living beyond her means. Now, if a public official is living so far beyond their means that they have a catastrophic failure to perform their duties to their constituants, who'sa fault is that?

Perhaps she only needed one house? Then she could have afforded to DO HER FUCKIN" JOB, instead of getting shot.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
Congresspersons and Senators are required to maintain two residences--one in the State they represent and one in DC. So, she had no choice in the matter.

However, I am certain she could have afforded *some* security. Between her income and that of her Navy officer husband they probably aren't doing too badly in that department.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
Her income alone makes them rich in my book. For that money, I could hire a great security team.

..they'd be Crips or HA, but shit, they'd have been better than nothing.

A public servant should be well aquainted with frugality.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
Yes, I agree, Boog. Plenty of...semi-professional "security" workers in Tucson. Wink

I read an article about the shooter. Turns out he'd been upset with Giffords for the last three years.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
There was no need for this, and it reeks of an orchestrated publicity stunt. Mainly because if public officials are this stupid, there's no need for them at all.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
Originally posted by BIOH4Z4RD:
I think the political right's efforts to disassociate themselves with this tragedy will be just as interesting as the investigation of the event itself.


At least Glenn Beck's website contains a sensible, measured response:



What a complete tool...
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
Originally posted by Boogerhead:
Her income alone makes them rich in my book. For that money, I could hire a great security team.

..they'd be Crips or HA, but shit, they'd have been better than nothing.

A public servant should be well aquainted with frugality.


No you couldn't, even bar bouncers make 10-15 an hour. Real bodyguards I've known make twice that. Times two guys, times two shifts, figure if not 24 hour coverage then minimum of 100 man hours of work per week. Guys that good won't take a job with no hours so you have to garauntee a minimum number of hours. Plus you have to transport, feed, and, if traveling, house them. If you hire a private security company your looking at even more money.

So yeah, she doesn't make enough for security. More importantly, she shouldn't need it.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
quote:
It is unlikely she could afford it. Not that congressmen are poor but in general they don't have gigantic incomes... $200k a year is the average and, although it sounds lame, that only covers an upper middle class lifestyle with two residences.


So that's another job they can cram up their asses. I don't know what I'm going to do when I grow up.
 
Like Like (0 likes)
Permalink
 
Post Reply