50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25400
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Jun 21, 2016 4:53 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:@ucim: You repeat the old claim that outlawing guns will just mean murderers use illegal guns (with the implication that they will do so at the same rate), but without evidence to support your claim that guns are different from every *successfully* restricted thing, that's just a baseless bit of propaganda.
Are guns somehow different from every *unsuccessfully* restricted thng?
Guns have been successfully restricted in every other first-world nation, for one.

ALso, guns are ubiquitous in the US, but I suspect we'd see more evidence of crimes committed with homemade firearms if they were as easy to make as Tyndmyr suggested, or as drugs and alcohol are to make.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 5096
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby ucim » Tue Jun 21, 2016 4:56 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:Your argument is that gun bans do not work, am I right? Where are all the "assault rifles" mass murders today? It looks to me like the assault rifle ban is working.
If your goal is to ensure that all the dead people weren't shot with bullets that came from an "assault rifle", then yes, the ban worked. But if the goal is to significantly reduce the number of dead people, then I think the ban is irrelevant. The non-banned weapons are sufficient to accomplish the task.

The bullets don't care.

For a gun ban to "work" (eliminate mass shootings), you'd have to pretty much eliminate all guns in the civilian populace, leaving police to be the only ones that had them. There would be unpleasant side effects.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5203
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Jun 21, 2016 4:58 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:Your argument is that gun bans do not work, am I right? Where are all the "assault rifles" mass murders today? It looks to me like the assault rifle ban is working.
If your goal is to ensure that all the dead people weren't shot with bullets that came from an "assault rifle", then yes, the ban worked. But if the goal is to significantly reduce the number of dead people, then I think the ban is irrelevant. The non-banned weapons are sufficient to accomplish the task.


Oh come on. Fully automatic assault rifles with high-capacity magazines would have made this shooting significantly worse.

I'm not naive enough to think we're going to stop these attacks. My goal is far simpler and far more achievable: just to make it harder for these terrorists to actually conduct an attack.

I'm 100% certain that violent offenders will move onto other weapons. Bombs, vehicles, swords have all been discussed. Or more likely: they'll move onto Pistols or maybe hunting rifles. Which have lower accuracy, lower-capacity magazines, and fewer customization options.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4301
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby LaserGuy » Tue Jun 21, 2016 5:05 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:Your argument is that gun bans do not work, am I right? Where are all the "assault rifles" mass murders today? It looks to me like the assault rifle ban is working.


If your goal is to ensure that all the dead people weren't shot with bullets that came from an "assault rifle", then yes, the ban worked. But if the goal is to significantly reduce the number of dead people, then I think the ban is irrelevant. The non-banned weapons are sufficient to accomplish the task.

The bullets don't care.

For a gun ban to "work" (eliminate mass shootings), you'd have to pretty much eliminate all guns in the civilian populace, leaving police to be the only ones that had them. There would be unpleasant side effects.

Jose


Police brutality is not significantly hampered by having an armed populace. If anything, in the particular case of the United States, it is much worse, since American police are apparently much more likely to respond with lethal violence than police in other jurisdictions.

speising
Posts: 1899
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby speising » Tue Jun 21, 2016 5:07 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:Your argument is that gun bans do not work, am I right? Where are all the "assault rifles" mass murders today? It looks to me like the assault rifle ban is working.
If your goal is to ensure that all the dead people weren't shot with bullets that came from an "assault rifle", then yes, the ban worked. But if the goal is to significantly reduce the number of dead people, then I think the ban is irrelevant. The non-banned weapons are sufficient to accomplish the task.

The bullets don't care.

For a gun ban to "work" (eliminate mass shootings), you'd have to pretty much eliminate all guns in the civilian populace, leaving police to be the only ones that had them. There would be unpleasant side effects.

Jose

Are you claiming that guns in civilian hands keep police brutality at a lower level right now?

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Vahir » Tue Jun 21, 2016 5:36 pm UTC

I don't care how brutal the police is, the answer isn't to shoot officers. And that's what "arming the populace to stop brutality" leads to. + What the others said.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Jun 21, 2016 5:40 pm UTC

SecondTalon wrote:
BattleMoose wrote:How is this even a discussion. If people are choosing to carry out attacks with assault rifles,

LaserGuy wrote:I'm not a gun person, so I probably have no idea what I'm talking about here, but couldn't you just define assault rifles as

Tyndmyr wrote:1. "assault rifles" functionally, are not different from other rifles.


Yes, Tyndmyr, they are.

An assault rifle is a selective-fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine. This is not debatable, this is not in question, this is the international standard. An assault rifle a selective-fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine. If it does not have all three of those qualities, it is not an assault rifle.

An AR-15 does indeed use a detachable magazine and can indeed fire an intermediate cartridge. It is not capable (off the shelf at least) of selective fire. So an AR-15 is not an assault rifle.

...

That's one of the reasons many gun owners and opponents found the ban to be moronic. Because it was. I mean, yes, it was better than nothing, but the criteria was .... absurd and arbitrary.


In the official definition, yes. That's all entirely correct.

Unfortunately, the waters are muddied by media usage and the language of various 'assault weapon bans' in the US, all of which use different definitions. Not necessarily consistent with each other, either. Assault rifle, is, colloquially, treated as the rifle subset of 'assault weapon' by most people who do understand guns, I think.

BattleMoose wrote:
The Swiss, for instance, also embraces this concept.


No, they don't. While its true that army reservists are required to keep their military issued weapon with them, it is not an armed citizenry. It is militarily trained people, who have their military issued weapon on hand, so should they be called to action, they then form up into military units.

It is so far removed from the untrained armed citizenry of the USA who are somehow expected to, I just don't even.


Yeah, but the vast majority of the citizenry are reservists. Well, men at least. So, in practice, it is "the citizenry".

Leaving aside the gender bias, anyways. But I can't think of any practical reason to exclude women nowadays. Certainly not mass violence, given that they basically never engage in it.

KnightExemplar wrote:A side note: "Assault Rifles" are effectively banned for civilian use in the US. "Assault Weapons" are not.

This terminology sucks. I've been writing about "Assault Weapons" but now that I'm rereading posts, it seems like a lot of people were saying "assault rifles" (probably due to the confusing terminology in this discussion). Uggghhhh... I'm pretty sure most people are talking about "Assault Weapons", the vague term that is utter bollocks.


It is obnoxious. It's super easy for conversations to get entirely derailed onto terminology, just because gun control advocates/media do not understand/use standard terminology. So, it's kind of a clusterfuck.

In practice, when most people use those words, they are talking about black rifles. AR-15 and similar.

KnightExemplar wrote:And note that NONE of the 12 shootings I've discussed used machine guns or "assault rifles". They used only the easy-to-get AR15 or similar weapons. This should be taken as proof that the 1986 ban on "assault rifles" is working.


Leaving aside legality, nobody is going to grab an M60 because it costs more than most vehicles, it's heavy as crap, eats ammo, and is meant to be a crew served weapon. It would probably be a poor choice simply for practical reasons. Movies love "all the bullets" scenes, but in the real world, automatic weapons are definitely not a better choice in all circumstances.

These weapons weren't a problem before that law either, so pointing at that law as the delta is questionable.

BattleMoose wrote:When it comes to gun bans, I think for the most part, no one really cares about the assault terminology. For the most part I think people just think civilians should not be able to own guns, period. That's the culture here in Australia.

IF you want something for hunting, which is a thing, then, you better be living in the sticks and single round breach loading thing, is the most I think people could agree to.


In the US, people do not wish to agree to that. Different culture.

SecondTalon wrote:As I keep saying to people in various places - if you can't be bothered to learn the difference between Assault Rifle (something very difficult, time consuming, expensive, and invites the Feds to be all up in your business) and Assault Weapon (Definition varies), you will never get a gun rights supporter to even give your argument a second glance.

Ever.


I try to. I try to avoid pedantic distinctions of clip vs mag, and rifle vs weapon and whatever, because those get frustrating.

But I admit that people talking about something they clearly have no understanding of does diminish credibility at least somewhat. Using correct terminology does make for a stronger argument. It's certainly a valid point.

Vahir wrote:I don't care how brutal the police is, the answer isn't to shoot officers. And that's what "arming the populace to stop brutality" leads to. + What the others said.


I think this may be ranging far from the original topic.

However, police do not actually seem to be shot frequently in the US. Spree shooters do not seem to be targeting police. If anything, they are deliberately selecting venues without defense.

So, I'm not sure that there's any large effect either way here. It seems like police are all too willing to engage in violence even when no firearm is present, and this fact is clearly known. So, I don't see it as either a cause or a solution, given current usage.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7210
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Zamfir » Tue Jun 21, 2016 5:59 pm UTC


This your daily reminder that the gun control thread is over there.

User avatar
Sizik
Posts: 1123
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:48 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Sizik » Tue Jun 21, 2016 6:17 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:
This your daily reminder that the gun control thread is over there.


Specifically, over there
gmalivuk wrote:
King Author wrote:If space (rather, distance) is an illusion, it'd be possible for one meta-me to experience both body's sensory inputs.
Yes. And if wishes were horses, wishing wells would fill up very quickly with drowned horses.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5203
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Jun 21, 2016 6:27 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:And note that NONE of the 12 shootings I've discussed used machine guns or "assault rifles". They used only the easy-to-get AR15 or similar weapons. This should be taken as proof that the 1986 ban on "assault rifles" is working.


Leaving aside legality, nobody is going to grab an M60 because it costs more than most vehicles, it's heavy as crap, eats ammo, and is meant to be a crew served weapon. It would probably be a poor choice simply for practical reasons. Movies love "all the bullets" scenes, but in the real world, automatic weapons are definitely not a better choice in all circumstances.

These weapons weren't a problem before that law either, so pointing at that law as the delta is questionable.


The weapon used in this Orlando shooting was a Semi-automatic Sig Sauer MCX. The only reason this weapon was semi-automatic instead of fully-automatic was because of the 1986 weapons ban. I am saying if the Sig Sauer MCX were put into "burst" or fully-automatic mode, this tragedy could have been a lot worse. Fortunately, the 1986 ban of sales of fully-automatic rifles prevented this tragedy from being worse.

And btw: Fully-automatic weapons were a problem before they were banned. Hell, they continued to be a problem after the ban (See Hollywood Shootout). So yes, I'm fully aware that bans aren't complete. But in this Orlando case, where a simple civilian rifle was used, the 1986 ban seems to have mitigated this tragedy.

I'm not talking about full-size machine guns. I'm talking about comparable weapons to this case.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Lucrece » Tue Jun 21, 2016 7:02 pm UTC

Deva wrote:
BattleMoose wrote:Of all the unknowns in this story, target selection isn't one of them. Because he is a homophobic cunt? Violence against homosexuals is normalised?

Gives high odds to being homosexual. Frequented that nightclub for years. Also, from previous sources:
She said she and other employees always assumed Mateen was gay.

Mateen hung out at the mall with an openly gay former classmate, Samuel King, and many of King’s gay friends.

“He had to know [we were gay], but I never got any sense of homophobia or aggression from him,” King said.

From as early as his days at Indian River Community College, some friends and co-workers wondered whether Mateen was gay. Some simply assumed it.

One former classmate at the college told the Palm Beach Post that he believed Mateen was gay and that Mateen once tried to pick him up at a bar.

The classmate, who is gay but was not out yet in 2006, said he and Mateen and other classmates would sometimes go to gay nightclubs after classes. On one such evening, the classmate said, Mateen asked him whether he was gay, which he denied.

“He said, ‘Well if you were gay, you would be my type.’ I said okay and just went on with the night,” said the classmate, who was not identified by the newspaper. “It was not anything too crazy, but I take that as a pickup line.”

But a number of men have told media outlets in the past week that they traded messages with Mateen on gay dating apps such as Jack’d.

One Orlando man, Cord Cedeno, 23, told The Post that Mateen reached out to him on Grindr, another gay dating app.

Other Source wrote: The ex-wife of Orlando mass killer Omar Mateen claimed Monday that she believed he was homosexual.

Versus their father.
The elder Mateen has expressed strict conservative views about homosexuality, posting a video on his Facebook page saying that “God himself will punish those involved in homosexuality. This is not for the servants” of God.

Seddique Mateen said he didn’t believe his son was gay, telling reporters, “I don’t believe he was a whatever-you-call-it.”

He said his son Mateen had become enraged a few months earlier at the sight of a pair of gay men being affectionate with each other.



http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2016/06/21/73660


So you people can also stop floating this bullshit that attending gay bars makes you gay. Just in that piece, 2 straight men from the dead victims of the Orlando shooting. One a long time frequenter, because he liked the "relaxed environment, without people trying to impress each other".

ISIS makes dating profile apps to case out their targets. If you bothered to Google, it's not uncommon that gay men using Grindr can often be robbed and assaulted/murdered by the men they meet, who pretend to be gay men on these apps and turn out to be straight men seeking to victimize them.

Self-hating closet case is a tired narrative seeking to deflect responsibility from the prime sector of the populace that overwhelmingly targets and victimizes gay people.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5502
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby sardia » Tue Jun 21, 2016 7:09 pm UTC

Does the newest evidence show he's a mass shooter and not a closeted gay man? I didn't think the confirmed anything yet. Hell, they haven't confirmed his Isis connection either.

User avatar
EdgarJPublius
Official Propagandi.... Nifty Poster Guy
Posts: 3515
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 4:56 am UTC
Location: where the wind takes me

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby EdgarJPublius » Tue Jun 21, 2016 7:16 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:And note that NONE of the 12 shootings I've discussed used machine guns or "assault rifles". They used only the easy-to-get AR15 or similar weapons. This should be taken as proof that the 1986 ban on "assault rifles" is working.


Actually, of the 13 mass shootings you listed, only 5 used an 'AR-15 or similar weapon' the majority were committed with pistols and shotguns.

gmalivuk wrote: I suspect we'd see more evidence of crimes committed with homemade firearms if they were as easy to make as Tyndmyr suggested, or as drugs and alcohol are to make.


We do see a decent number of crimes comitted with home-made firearms. both in the U.S. and in countries with more restrive gun laws. Also, we know the Cartels and many of the larger domestic gangs have sophisticated manufacturing capabilities. Even in Europe there have been many instances of sophisticated illegally manufactured firearms being produced and smuggled throughout the region.

Also also, there will always be a significant market for legal firearms, unless you somehow convince all the worlds armies and law enforcement agencies to disarm. For many types of criminal, it will generally be more economical to divert those legal firearms. The USSR is still a significant source for illegal firearms in Europe, and the Mexican military is a major source for firearms to the cartels.

@Zamfir:.

This happens to literally every one of these threads and despite exhortations to move conversation to one of the existing gun-control threads, that never happens. Even if this thread is locked or people get kicked out of it, the conversation will just stop rather than move to another thread. Then there will be no on-going gun-control discussion until the next mass shooting thread. I think there needs to be a new approach to these threads.
Roosevelt wrote:
I wrote:Does Space Teddy Roosevelt wrestle Space Bears and fight the Space Spanish-American War with his band of Space-volunteers the Space Rough Riders?

Yes.

-still unaware of the origin and meaning of his own user-title

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7210
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Zamfir » Tue Jun 21, 2016 7:46 pm UTC


Edgar, you don't get to ignore mod requests if you disagree with them. I asked repeatedly to stop the general gun control debate. You continue anyway, and not by accident. Do this again, and you're banned from this thread.

I want this to be very clear for everyone. If you disagree with a mod policy, send me a PM. We'll talk about it, and we'll see what comes out. But in the mean time, stick to the current policy.


User avatar
Deva
Has suggestions for the murderers out there.
Posts: 1903
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 5:18 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Deva » Tue Jun 21, 2016 8:01 pm UTC

sardia wrote:Does the newest evidence show he's a mass shooter and not a closeted gay man? I didn't think the confirmed anything yet. Hell, they haven't confirmed his Isis connection either.

Discovered no Islamic State connection as of Thursday.
Source wrote: A feature of Isis terrorism is to permit anyone who so chooses to use its name to advance mutual goals, regardless of any actual ties to the group. On Thursday the CIA director, John Brennan, testified that his agency had found no connection between Mateen and Isis.
Changes its form depending on the observer.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Jun 21, 2016 8:05 pm UTC

Wrote a response, opted to spoiler it since it did get way too guncontrol-centric. Moving on to the less gun-centric things.

Spoiler:
KnightExemplar wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:And note that NONE of the 12 shootings I've discussed used machine guns or "assault rifles". They used only the easy-to-get AR15 or similar weapons. This should be taken as proof that the 1986 ban on "assault rifles" is working.


Leaving aside legality, nobody is going to grab an M60 because it costs more than most vehicles, it's heavy as crap, eats ammo, and is meant to be a crew served weapon. It would probably be a poor choice simply for practical reasons. Movies love "all the bullets" scenes, but in the real world, automatic weapons are definitely not a better choice in all circumstances.

These weapons weren't a problem before that law either, so pointing at that law as the delta is questionable.


The weapon used in this Orlando shooting was a Semi-automatic Sig Sauer MCX. The only reason this weapon was semi-automatic instead of fully-automatic was because of the 1986 weapons ban. I am saying if the Sig Sauer MCX were put into "burst" or fully-automatic mode, this tragedy could have been a lot worse. Fortunately, the 1986 ban of sales of fully-automatic rifles prevented this tragedy from being worse.


Not necessarily. Full auto fire burns ammo extremely rapidly and inefficiently. Significant muzzle climb, etc. They're really more for vehicles, covering fire, suppressive fire, etc. An untrained shooter will not necessarily be more effective with one.

Hell, most trained shooters generally prefer semi-auto in combat scenarios. Ammo is always limited.

And btw: Fully-automatic weapons were a problem before they were banned. Hell, they continued to be a problem after the ban (See Hollywood Shootout). So yes, I'm fully aware that bans aren't complete. But in this Orlando case, where a simple civilian rifle was used, the 1986 ban seems to have mitigated this tragedy.

I'm not talking about full-size machine guns. I'm talking about comparable weapons to this case.


The N. Hollywood shootout fully auto weapons* were illegally modified by the owners, not purchased as such, so...not really a good example for your case that the law somehow stopped this. Illegal before, illegal after. The fellow buying the guns was a convicted felon, who was banned from owning ANY firearms.

As for efficacy, the fact that one of said modded full-auto guns jammed and had to be discarded doesn't really support your narrative.

Mostly, this incident was a demonstration that rifles are miles more effective than pistols in scenarios where both sides are prepared and expecting a fight.

EdgarJPublius wrote:We do see a decent number of crimes comitted with home-made firearms. both in the U.S. and in countries with more restrive gun laws. Also, we know the Cartels and many of the larger domestic gangs have sophisticated manufacturing capabilities. Even in Europe there have been many instances of sophisticated illegally manufactured firearms being produced and smuggled throughout the region.


The recent MP shooting in England was done with a homemade gun. That's pretty recent and high profile.

*They mostly used semi-automatic weapons.


Anyway, gun control bills are dying at any rate. They were never seriously expected to pass, they were merely opportunism, not a solution. So, in any sort of practical sense, it's not really relevant. One could make the case that these particular attempts have a tinge of anti-Islamic/immigrant/outsider sentiment, I suppose. I'm presuming that the watch list does not consist predominantly of white guys here, but that seems probable.

In general, I think there's a lot of danger to scope creep in terms of watch lists and such. I mean, you *need* a list of people to watch, in order to investigate or whatever, but if you start ascribing guilt/limitations based purely on suspicion, that's almost certainly going to result in abuse. The level of evidence is far lower than a conviction. Way easier for things like bias to creep in. There are areas in which I'm not even sure that the current legal process is sufficient(say, death penalty, usually), I'm really not enthused about diminishing it.

sardia wrote:Does the newest evidence show he's a mass shooter and not a closeted gay man? I didn't think the confirmed anything yet. Hell, they haven't confirmed his Isis connection either.


We really don't know for sure. There's a lot of "I assumed" in the statements.

However, in lieu of better evidence, I will presume he did not repeatedly drive 120 miles to a gay club for the food.

Likewise, there's reason to at least suspect that he had a degree of disapproval for gay folks. Or at least was trained to think he should have that. I don't think we can easily say that "closeted gay man" is a sufficient explanation, case closed, but the currently available information makes at least *some* degree of these things a reasonable supposition.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5203
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby KnightExemplar » Tue Jun 21, 2016 8:10 pm UTC

This "closet gay man" theory is intriguing, but witnesses are notoriously unreliable. I find it unlikely that he'd take his wife to the club to "scope it out" if he were already familiar with the club's layout from years of visits.

I think I saw a report where his wife claimed that he's gay somewhere. Which is someone I'd trust in this capacity to make a judgement. Anyone got a link to that fact? (or is it something my mind made up while reading this thread?)
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Jun 21, 2016 8:19 pm UTC

I haven't seen that directly. She claimed he beat her, is the claim I've been seeing everywhere, but that unfortunately doesn't tell us a great deal, save that the relationship between the two probably wasn't great. I wouldn't put too much weight in that for one thing or the other.

There's varying levels of familiarity. Plus "gay" isn't even really binary. Maybe he checked it out a coupla times because he was curious, but really hadn't been in a while. The data right now wouldn't really differentiate that from a solid regular. It's just a coupla random anecdotal bits here and there.

His identity as gay or not isn't really that essential, though. I think that was the whole point of "gay people can be homophobic as well". So, one need not unravel his precise preferences in order to suspect that he may have a hatred issue. We can't be sure of that either, yet, but it means we can't just rule it out, as some have suggested.

User avatar
Deva
Has suggestions for the murderers out there.
Posts: 1903
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 5:18 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Deva » Tue Jun 21, 2016 8:22 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:I think I saw a report where his wife claimed that he's gay somewhere. Which is someone I'd trust in this capacity to make a judgement. Anyone got a link to that fact? (or is it something my mind made up while reading this thread?)

Only ex-wife. Added slightly more. Scrutinize the source as desired.
Other Source wrote: The ex-wife of Orlando mass killer Omar Mateen claimed Monday that she believed he was homosexual — as it was revealed that he frequented the gay nightclub where he staged the nation’s worst massacre in modern times.

Sitora Yusufiy, who was married to Mateen in 2009 for three months, made the shocking claim on Brazilian television station SBT Brazil.

Her fiancé, Marco Dias, speaking in Portuguese on her behalf, said Yusufiy believed that Mateen had “gay tendencies” and that his father had called him gay in front of her. Dias also claimed “the FBI asked her not to tell this to the American media.”

______

Tyndmyr wrote:Maybe he checked it out a coupla times because he was curious, but really hadn't been in a while. The data right now wouldn't really differentiate that from a solid regular. It's just a coupla random anecdotal bits here and there.

Source wrote:Chris Callen, who worked at Pulse as a performer, said he had seen Mateen dozens of times. According to Callen's estimate, Mateen visited Pulse twice a month over three years.

Works out to roughly every other week. Remains only an estimate based on memory, of course.
Changes its form depending on the observer.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5502
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby sardia » Tue Jun 21, 2016 8:51 pm UTC

[list=][/list] does anyone know the difference between a mass shooter assumption vs a terrorist attack assumption vs a hate crime assumption? I know the FBI is increasingly thinking it's a mass shooter event, not terrorism.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3737
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Dauric » Tue Jun 21, 2016 9:11 pm UTC

sardia wrote:[list=][/list] does anyone know the difference between a mass shooter assumption vs a terrorist attack assumption vs a hate crime assumption? I know the FBI is increasingly thinking it's a mass shooter event, not terrorism.


U.S. Code Title 22 Chapter 38, Section 2656f(d) defines terrorism as: “Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.”

From Wikipedia entry on Terrorism.

The U.S. definition requires a "Subnational group" or similar. In order to force a national government or public culture to change behaviors there needs to be an ongoing threat of consequences for failure to comply. A Lone Wolf shooter doesn't constitute an ongoing threat, no reason for the public to be terrorized after the event, no ongoing pressure on the public to alter behaviors.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

Chen
Posts: 5075
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Chen » Wed Jun 22, 2016 11:56 am UTC

Dauric wrote:The U.S. definition requires a "Subnational group" or similar. In order to force a national government or public culture to change behaviors there needs to be an ongoing threat of consequences for failure to comply. A Lone Wolf shooter doesn't constitute an ongoing threat, no reason for the public to be terrorized after the event, no ongoing pressure on the public to alter behaviors.


Well he claimed he was allied with ISIS despite there not being any formal connection there. If you start doing things in the name of a terrorist group, does that automatically make it terrorism? Even without actually directing him in any way, he's still falling into a narrative that helps ISIS. I mean they even acknowledged him after the fact.

I mean a suicide bomber attack, when the attacker claims they are working for some Islamist terrorist group, is still going to be considered a terrorist attack even if it's a rare (or one of) event. The bomber in person clearly can't continue terrorizing people (just as the case of a lone wolf who commits suicide), but the idea that others may follow is where the terrorism aspect comes from.

Thinking about it a bit more I don't even know if the real motive is necessary. Him claiming allegiance to ISIS and them acknowledging him, already seems to plant the seed of worry among a populace. Following that calling it terrorism kinda makes sense. Now, it doesn't have to ONLY be terrorism though. It's clearly and angry mass shooter event as well. Would also fall under the hate crime label if he was at all also motivated to kill gay people in particular. These don't all seem mutually exclusive or anything.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25400
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jun 22, 2016 12:34 pm UTC

He murdered a bunch of LGBT people in a gay club during Pride month. All this bandying about of "if" is beyond ridiculous.

A person doesn't do that if their goal is just to kill random clubgoers.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jun 22, 2016 1:30 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:He murdered a bunch of LGBT people in a gay club during Pride month. All this bandying about of "if" is beyond ridiculous.

A person doesn't do that if their goal is just to kill random clubgoers.


They certainly could.

1. The first two discriminators are in fact the same variable. He wasn't selecting for only LGBT folks(which WOULD be strong evidence), he just kinda opened up on whoever was there.
2. About 1/12 mass shootings are gonna be in pride month.

A person looking to kill a lot of people could in fact hit these two factors by accident. I've not yet heard ANYTHING talking about why "pride month" is significant.

We have evidence pointing in a certain way, yes, but we shouldn't just discount ALL other ideas based solely on these two things.

Chen wrote:Well he claimed he was allied with ISIS despite there not being any formal connection there. If you start doing things in the name of a terrorist group, does that automatically make it terrorism? Even without actually directing him in any way, he's still falling into a narrative that helps ISIS. I mean they even acknowledged him after the fact.


If a given group can repeatedly inspire lone wolf attacks, that sounds like terrorism to me. Just an annoyingly hard to stop variety.

morriswalters
Posts: 6506
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby morriswalters » Wed Jun 22, 2016 2:12 pm UTC

He murdered a bunch of LGBT people in a gay club during Pride month. All this bandying about of "if" is beyond ridiculous.

A person doesn't do that if their goal is just to kill random clubgoers.
Of course a possible alternative is that he knew there would be an easy crowd and it would garner a lot of attention. And he was familiar with the scene. It would be nice if what he did was so easily accounted for so it could be wrapped in brown paper and tied neatly with string and put away, but like most things it isn't.
Chen wrote:Thinking about it a bit more I don't even know if the real motive is necessary. Him claiming allegiance to ISIS and them acknowledging him, already seems to plant the seed of worry among a populace. Following that calling it terrorism kinda makes sense. Now, it doesn't have to ONLY be terrorism though. It's clearly and angry mass shooter event as well. Would also fall under the hate crime label if he was at all also motivated to kill gay people in particular. These don't all seem mutually exclusive or anything.
This.

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby BattleMoose » Wed Jun 22, 2016 2:57 pm UTC

Chen wrote:Well he claimed he was allied with ISIS


If a given group can repeatedly inspire lone wolf attacks, that sounds like terrorism to me. Just an annoyingly hard to stop variety.


Do you know, what ISIS does to gay people!?!!

EDIT: Quotes fixed.
Last edited by BattleMoose on Wed Jun 22, 2016 3:05 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jun 22, 2016 3:02 pm UTC

BattleMoose wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Well he claimed he was allied with ISIS


Do you know, what ISIS does to gay people!?!!


Are you quoting Chen?

But yes, I suspect everyone here is aware. Obviously, he chose poorly, and had some issues.

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby BattleMoose » Wed Jun 22, 2016 3:05 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
BattleMoose wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Well he claimed he was allied with ISIS


Do you know, what ISIS does to gay people!?!!


Are you quoting Chen?

But yes, I suspect everyone here is aware. Obviously, he chose poorly, and had some issues.


I fixed the quote. The question stands.

User avatar
Lazar
Landed Gentry
Posts: 2151
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Lazar » Wed Jun 22, 2016 6:01 pm UTC

It's not unknown for people to align themselves with extremist movements despite having hated attributes. There have been gay and part-Jewish (neo)-Nazis; Kim Jong-il married a Japanese-born woman who nomally would have belonged to the so-called "hostile class". By now there's substantial evidence that Mateen was gay; there's also evidence that his sexuality disgusted him to the point of homicidal (and arguably suicidal) rage.

Note, also, that the Abahamic proscriptions on homosexuality concern actions, not inclinations. Even reactionary authorities in the three faiths tend to agree that homosexuality in itself is not evil; it merely predisposes one to commit evil. So he may have thought of his sexuality as something he could escape.
And remember, my friends, future events such as these will affect you in the future.

User avatar
Deva
Has suggestions for the murderers out there.
Posts: 1903
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 5:18 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Deva » Wed Jun 22, 2016 6:16 pm UTC

Interviewed someone. Described their relationship as friends with benefits.
Source wrote:Miguel told Univison that he believes Mateen intentionally targeted Latinos in retribution for feeling rejected by Puerto Ricans.

"I believe this is not terrorism," Miguel said, despite investigators saying Mateen called 911 and posted to Facebook to pledge allegiance to ISIS during the rampage.

Rather, Miguel claimed Mateen was acting on revenge after being with a Puerto Rican man whom he later learned was HIV positive. "He hate gay Puerto Ricans for all the stuff he did to him," Miguel said. "I believe this crazy horrible thing he did was for revenge." Miguel said that Mateen's wife knew he was gay, and that his father forced him into an arranged marriage.

Miguel added that he and Mateen also talked about religion. "He said Muslim religion is beautiful, beautiful religion, where everything is about love," he said. "Everybody is welcome. Gay, trans, bisexual... everybody."

Miguel said that Mateen never appeared to be violent. "He was looking for love," Miguel said. "He was looking to be embraced."


Received lots of claims. May or may not have confirmed this. Presents a different picture, though.

Edit: Bought airplane tickets to California too. Purchased them two days prior to the shooting. Scheduled to fly on July 14. Intended to visit an ill family member, apparently. Source.
Changes its form depending on the observer.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Lucrece » Wed Jun 22, 2016 8:16 pm UTC

I'm not going to descend into pitiful rumor mills. It's easy to corroborate if someone was actually romantically involved, and there's a multitude of ways to determine his inclinations besides mere heresay from someone who merely wants 15 minutes of fame.

Check his PC browsing history and chat history. If he's truly gay, you'll find frequent visits to gay porn sites most likely, and multiple contacts with gay men that indicate consummation.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 8382
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Jun 23, 2016 6:03 am UTC

Well, he said that the trigger was that the shooter found out one of his partners had HIV, not something you want others to know about someone you are claiming to have slept with.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25400
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Jun 23, 2016 12:35 pm UTC

That just means you're unlikely to be able to determine whether serophobia played a role in the shooter's motivations.

It doesn't tell you anything about how gay his porn preferences are expected to be.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Deva
Has suggestions for the murderers out there.
Posts: 1903
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 5:18 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Deva » Fri Jun 24, 2016 3:17 am UTC

Fulfulled Lucrece’s request.
Source wrote:Since the shooting at an Orlando nightclub last week that left 49 people dead, reports have emerged that gunman Omar Mateen frequented the gay club, used gay dating apps and had gay lovers.

But the FBI has found no evidence so far to support claims by those who say Mateen had gay lovers or communicated on gay dating apps, several law enforcement officials said.

On Tuesday, Univision aired a report in which “Miguel,” a man wearing a disguise to conceal his identity, alleged he had sex with Mateen after meeting him on the gay dating app, Grindr. He said Mateen had sex with other men too, including a threesome with a Puerto Rican who allegedly told Mateen, after having had unprotected sex with him, that he was HIV positive.

But investigators do not consider the man’s account credible, according to one senior law enforcement official with access to the investigation.
In seeking to verify the reports, federal agents have culled Mateen's electronic devices, including a laptop computer and cellphone, as well as electronic communications of those who made the claims, law enforcement officials said.

So far, they have found no photographs, no text messages, no smartphone apps, no gay pornography and no cell-tower location data to suggest that Mateen — who was twice married to women and had a young son — conducted a secret gay life, the officials said.

The FBI has not said whether it has uncovered any evidence that Mateen visited the Pulse nightclub prior to the shooting.

But law enforcement sources did say that investigators have not uncovered any direct links between Mateen and members of Islamic State.

It is possible that Mateen might have had communications on cellphones or other electronic equipment that have not been recovered by investigators in the wake of the shooting.

Feels undecided about motive at present. Reported lots of contradicting information. (Expected some. Commits mistakes of identity and memory. Attracts liars seeking fame. Disregarded multiple shooter and hoax theories immediately too.) Still wishes to know more about them. Wonders how/if someone could have prevented them from snapping. Applies to more than one person, potentially.
___________

Updated injuries on Tuesday, also.
Source wrote:Of the 35 patients at ORCM, 19 have been discharged.
Of the 12 patients at Florida Hospital, nine have been discharged.

Four patients at ORMC remain in critical condition, a drop from a total of six last week. No information is available on their prognosis.

Appears to be going well.
Changes its form depending on the observer.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Lucrece » Fri Jun 24, 2016 4:34 am UTC

FBI: “No Evidence” Orlando Shooter Was Gay Or Used Gay Hookup Apps

Jim Burroway

June 23rd, 2016

Omar MateenThere has been widespread speculation about whether Omar Mateen, the man who killed 49 and injured more than 50 others at the Pulse gay night club in Orlando, might have been gay. The FBI has been investigating that possibility, and today says they cannot find any evidence that Mateen was leading “a secret gay life”:

Federal investigators have scoured Omar Mateen’s laptop computer, cell phone and the trail of communications he left behind and so far have found no evidence that he led a secret gay life, according to officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity about the ongoing investigation.

They’ve also reviewed the electronic devices of men who said they’d communicated with him on gay dating apps and so far have found no link.

…Investigators have not stopped following leads about Mateen’s reported interest in gay clubs and gay men, but federal officials reported Thursday that they’ve found no photographs, text messages, smart phone apps or gay pornography that suggest Mateen was gay or was trying to find a gay lover.

Several men have come forward claiming to have chatted with Mateen on gay dating apps. But:

Federal investigators, however, believe men making such claims may be confusing Mateen with someone else or are not credible, the officials said.

As for the man who, in a Univision interview, claimed to have been a regular “friend with benefits” with Mateen:

“We are not at liberty to confirm or deny specific interviews, nor the credibility of content … due to the ongoing investigation,” she wrote in an email.

Federal officials in Washington, however, said they do not believe that man’s claims are credible.



http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2016/0 ... nt-1910597

Hopefully we can do away with all this stupidity and innuendo passing off as "journalism". The likes of Chris Hayes should be ashamed.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5203
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby KnightExemplar » Fri Jun 24, 2016 4:52 am UTC

Cripes. You know what? I think I'm going to just straight up ignore any news outlet outside of the US. These Brazilian rumors are bullshit.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

Chen
Posts: 5075
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Chen » Sat Jun 25, 2016 1:09 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:Cripes. You know what? I think I'm going to just straight up ignore any news outlet outside of the US. These Brazilian rumors are bullshit.


A bunch of the original reports of him frequenting gay clubs and being to Pulse before were from US media sources too. So really it seems to be ignore pretty much everything that shows up within a couple days of the event...

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5609
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby Diadem » Sun Jun 26, 2016 12:48 am UTC

Sometimes I dream of starting a newspaper with the slogan "Yesterday's News, Tomorrow". My newspaper will only print stuff that happened at least 2 days ago. We'd focus on quality stories about stuff that's actually important, and we'll take our time to research things.

Our news cycle today is much faster than it has ever been. These days if there's an election today, then tomorrow's newspaper won't even bother printing the results. They'll only print the response of various parties and groups on the result. Maybe the actual results will be somewhere in there, but buried deep on one of the later pages. After the Orlando shooting, I noticed that the evening news didn't open with that there had been a shooting, but instead with various responses to the shooting, or theories about the attacker.

All of this leaves very little time for fact-checking. It leaves very little time for facts. Everything is reduced to soundbites and well, basically reality-theater. I think this has a very detrimental effects on society. And of course it's easy to say "everything was better in the past", and generally that argument is just wrong. But this is a genuine case where things were different in the past. Having much faster access to information is nice, and it makes things like censorship a lot harder, so that's good. But the above I think is a major downside.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

ijuin
Posts: 799
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:02 pm UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby ijuin » Sun Jun 26, 2016 2:49 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:My point is that in the strictest sense, punishing responsible gun owners by restricting what guns they have because of the actions of a few is at odds with the idea of not punishing the innocent to make sure we nab the guilty.
No, it isn't.

Being willing to impart a small penalty on innocent people (restricting what guns they can buy) is not at odds with being unwilling to impart a huge penalty on innocent people (imprisoning them for crimes they didn't commit.


You may consider restricting which guns citizens may possess as a "small" penalty, but hypothetically, the matter of whether I have a gun with me at a given moment can mean the difference between whether I survive or not if some jerkass decides to try to kill me. This is the viewpoint taken by a lot of "guns are personal protection" advocates.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5502
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 50 Dead, 53 Injured in Orlando Gay Club Shooting

Postby sardia » Sun Jun 26, 2016 3:11 am UTC

ijuin wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:My point is that in the strictest sense, punishing responsible gun owners by restricting what guns they have because of the actions of a few is at odds with the idea of not punishing the innocent to make sure we nab the guilty.
No, it isn't.

Being willing to impart a small penalty on innocent people (restricting what guns they can buy) is not at odds with being unwilling to impart a huge penalty on innocent people (imprisoning them for crimes they didn't commit.


You may consider restricting which guns citizens may possess as a "small" penalty, but hypothetically, the matter of whether I have a gun with me at a given moment can mean the difference between whether I survive or not if some jerkass decides to try to kill me. This is the viewpoint taken by a lot of "guns are personal protection" advocates.

Those advocates have a vested interest that you always want to have a type of gun, which decades before nobody wanted. They make money when you give in to fear. Not only is a single gun enough, you should buy multiple guns just in case. Guns are a durable good, and all the people who wanted them before already have them. The only way for the gun industry to make money is to sell to you on fear, thus creating new customers. Fear that anybody could have gun, must have a gun. Or that any incident anywhere, like a punch at a bar, could end in your death, unless you have a gun.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests