Attack leaves 50+ dead with 50+ wounded

madoka

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2004
4,344
712
121
How can they have mass murder when no one has any guns!!?!?!!?

http://www.rfa.org/english/news/uyghur/attack-09302015174319.html

The death toll in a knife attack orchestrated by alleged “separatists” at a coal mine in northwestern China’s troubled Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region has climbed to at least 50 people—including five police officers—with as many as 50 injured, according to local security officials who say nine suspects are on the run.

The attack occurred on Sept. 18, when a group of knife-wielding suspects set upon security guards at the gate of the Sogan Colliery in Aksu (in Chinese, Akesu) prefecture’s Bay (Baicheng) county, before targeting the mine owner’s residence and a dormitory for workers.

When police officers arrived at the mine in Terek township to control the situation, the attackers rammed their vehicles using trucks loaded down with coal, sources said.

Three sources, including a ruling Communist Party cadre from a local township government, told RFA’s Uyghur Service in recent days that at least 50 people were killed and as many as 50 injured in the attack—with most casualties suffered by the mine’s largely majority Han Chinese workers.

“The damage of the attack was very severe—that is why we are controlling [the flow of] information about the incident so strictly, lest we frighten Han migrants in Aksu,” said the cadre, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Last week, sources had estimated that at least 40 people were either killed or injured in the incident, including police officers, security guards, mine owners and managers, and attackers.

Other sources within the ethnic Uyghur exile communities in Sweden and Turkey have since put the number of dead as high as 110 and said the worker dormitory was the focus of the attack, although these accounts could not be independently verified by RFA.

Ekber Hashim, a police officer who inspected the mine’s dormitory following the incident, told RFA that “nearly all the workers who were not on shift at the time were killed or injured.”

“Some workers were sleeping while others were preparing to work when the attackers raided the building after killing the security guards,” he said.

The Sogan Colliery, consisting of three separate coal mine shafts, maintains a six-story dormitory to house its 300-400 workers—around 90 percent of whom are Han Chinese, according to official sources.

At least five policemen were also killed in the attack, including Terek township chief Wu Feng, 45, and officers Xiao Hu, 25; Zakirjan, 28; and Zayirjan Kurban, 27. The fifth officer has yet to be identified.

China must have the same retarded politicians and reactionary sheeple as they are now restricting knives:

http://www.rfa.org/english/news/uyghur/knives-09142015143756.html

Authorities in northwestern China’s troubled Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region are requiring residents to obtain special permits when purchasing kitchen knives and strictly controlling sales of bladed tools amid a crackdown on violence in the area following a spate of stabbing attacks, sources say.

According to an Aug. 26 notice issued by the municipal police department in Kashgar (in Chinese, Kashi) prefecture’s Kashgar city, anyone who plans to buy a chef’s knife must provide their name, ethnicity, address, ID number and telephone number when applying for a permit.

The notice—a photo of which was circulated late last month using the popular WeChat messaging app and other social media sites—says applicants must also include the name of the location where they will make the purchase, how many knives they plan to buy, and an explanation of what they will use them for.

On the application, the number of kitchen knives “must be written in Chinese characters, not in numerals,” the notice says, while any permit “will only be valid on the date of issue.” Successful applicants will be given a copy of their permit, while the “original will be provided to the police station.”
 

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,197
4
76
It really is disgusting how people try and go with the whole 'see it can happen without guns' crap after a tragedy.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,411
16,804
136
Because nine people killed most of the victims while they were in their sleep. It was in the article you posted. Next time just read the whole article before creating a whole thread for a question that could be easily answered had you done so;)
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Can we all just agree that mass murder is perfectly feasible without guns, but not nearly as easy?
 

madoka

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2004
4,344
712
121
It really is disgusting how people try and go with the whole 'see it can happen without guns' crap after a tragedy.

HAHAHAHA!

Straight out of the Obama handbook: never let a serious crisis to go to waste. :D
 

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
32,170
50,938
136
i've seen enough kung fu movies to see how this can happen
 

Indus

Lifer
May 11, 2002
15,748
10,934
136
HAHAHAHA!

Straight out of the Obama handbook: never let a serious crisis to go to waste. :D

Not even worth dignifying with a response.


Amanda Marcotte, "Conservatives aren’t lying when they say they need guns to feel protected. But it’s increasingly clear that they aren’t seeking protection from crime or even from the mythical jackbooted government goons come to kick in your door. No, the real threat is existential. Guns are a totemic shield against the fear that they are losing dominance as the country becomes more liberal and diverse and, well, modern. "
 
Last edited:

MagickMan

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2008
7,460
3
76
Gee, it's almost like there's a problem with certain people, not the weapons they're using. :eek:

HAHAHAHA!

Straight out of the Obama handbook: never let a serious crisis to go to waste. :D

"There are no wrong tactics, only wrong targets."
 

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
Can we all just agree that mass murder is perfectly feasible without guns, but not nearly as easy?


It depends on your definition of easy.

isis-bomb-vests.jpg
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Because nine people killed most of the victims while they were in their sleep. It was in the article you posted. Next time just read the whole article before creating a whole thread for a question that could be easily answered had you done so;)

In crazy Democrat land it doesn't count as murder if the victim is asleep?

Because I'm sure those parents who kill their children with a gun will NEVER have access to a knife while their children are asleep...

Nope, guns must be the problem. Not murderous parents.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,994
779
126
How can they have mass murder when no one has any guns!!?!?!!?

The attack occurred on Sept. 18, when a group of knife-wielding suspects

There's your answer. You think the Oregon shooter could have killed that many with a knife?
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
There's your answer. You think the Oregon shooter could have killed that many with a knife?

One of the worst mass murders ever is by a guy on an island in South Asia. The guy went on a rampage with a scythe and murdered the entire island village by himself over 8 or 9 hours. Of course it was a long time ago and on a mostly rural island with no real authority there. So no one to stop him. This is with a bladed implement by the way in the modern era and not technically the worst mass murder scenario.

Most of the worst rampage killings aren't even in the US.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers

We do have more school and work place related rampage killings. If one rules out stuff like Taliban and Al Queda killing girls going to schools for instance. Still, the fact remains that many workplace, schools, and theaters tend to be areas with lots of typically unarmed people. Which makes for easy targets for these sickos.
 
Last edited:

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,691
8,239
136
Just think, if they had guns it could be in the hundreds instead.

In support of your line of reasoning, allow me to expound on that a bit.

It's much more difficult and time consuming to hack somebody to death. In my mind, it also takes a higher level of commitment, a higher level of insanity and a much higher level of drug dosage. It's also much more daring and risky to the well-being of the hacker too, being hand-to-hand and all. It's more gruesome, much more intimately personal and a hell of a lot more exciting watching the hackee's body parts getting turned into hamburger or fall off even. And then you get to do that over and over again 'til either your arms droop limp or the blade richochets off of bone and you hack your other hand off.

Yep, killing folks by continuously pulling a well set trigger at 50 meters and hacking people to death face to face is VERY much the alike. I mean, think of the finger cramps. ouch /s
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,411
16,804
136
Why are you so fucking stupid? The OP asked how could there be a mass killing without guns, I explained to him how and told him the info he was seeking was in the article he posted.

Some how in your fucked up brain you took that to mean that democrats don't think it's murder if people are sleeping.

I don't know what to say other than if you came across your own post and didn't recognize who posted it you would have went off on one of your stupid rants. Because, supposedly you respond to stupid posts in kind.

Take a look a good look in the mirror, your whole attitude would change if you saw what you really are (hint: it's exactly the type of person you constantly complain about).


In crazy Democrat land it doesn't count as murder if the victim is asleep?

Because I'm sure those parents who kill their children with a gun will NEVER have access to a knife while their children are asleep...

Nope, guns must be the problem. Not murderous parents.
 
Jan 25, 2011
17,033
9,485
146
We do have more school and work place related rampage killings. If one rules out stuff like Taliban and Al Queda killing girls going to schools for instance. Still, the fact remains that many workplace, schools, and theaters tend to be areas with lots of typically unarmed people. Which makes for easy targets for these sickos.

And yet with all of these mass killings (let's face it. The number is ridiculously huge). All of these investigations. All of these manifestos. In the face of all of that not once has it ever been shown that being gun free had anything to do with their motivations and yet it keeps getting brought up like its in any way been demonstrated to be a part of these killers decision making process.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
And yet with all of these mass killings (let's face it. The number is ridiculously huge). All of these investigations. All of these manifestos. In the face of all of that not once has it ever been shown that being gun free had anything to do with their motivations and yet it keeps getting brought up like its in any way been demonstrated to be a part of these killers decision making process.

WTF nonsense are you spouting??? It was confirmed with both Adam Lanza and James Holmes both picked their targets because they were gun free areas. James specifically stated he avoided another theater first because it allowed people to carry guns and went out of his way to go to a theater farther from him to get into a "gun free" one.

These monsters aren't complete idiots. They don't just snap. They plan this out every single time. They decide on how they are going to kill, purchase the tools they believe they need to carry out their plan, and precisely target areas. It has ALWAYS been this way. Ever read the shit from the kids from the Columbine shooting? They had picked their school because it was a gun free zone packed with people. They also believed they could get away in the confusion and steal a plane to fly to Mexico before making their way to a country that doesn't have an extradition agreement with the US.

To further this point, many gunmen in these shooting rampages tend to turn the gun on themselves the moment they face armed opposition. This is exactly what happened in clackama mall incident. A concealed carry holder with his firearm pulled out his gun and aimed at the mass shooter. He didn't and wasn't even going to take the shot because he was so far away he was afraid he would hit someone else by accident. However, the mere action of pulling out his gun and aiming at the rampage shooter stopped the gunman cold. He saw the armed opposition and immediately shot himself.
 
Jan 25, 2011
17,033
9,485
146
WTF nonsense are you spouting??? It was confirmed with both Adam Lanza and James Holmes both picked their targets because they were gun free areas. James specifically stated he avoided another theater first because it allowed people to carry guns and went out of his way to go to a theater farther from him to get into a "gun free" one.

Evidence of both of those claims please? Not assertion or assumption. Evidence.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
Evidence of both of those claims please? Not assertion or assumption. Evidence.

As to Holmes, his diary more or less disproves this - http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/james-holmes-diary-aurora-gun-free-zones-debunked - and I have never heard any such thing as to Lanza. There is little tangible evidence regarding his motives since, as I understand it, he left no note or diary, and largely destroyed the computers in his house. Obviously choosing to go to an elementary school of all places had more to to with the level of his anger and depravity than with whether the school was a gun-free zone.
 
Jan 25, 2011
17,033
9,485
146
As to Holmes, his diary more or less disproves this - http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/05/james-holmes-diary-aurora-gun-free-zones-debunked - and I have never heard any such thing as to Lanza. There is little tangible evidence regarding his motives since, as I understand it, he left no note or diary, and largely destroyed the computers in his house. Obviously choosing to go to an elementary school of all places had more to to with the level of his anger and depravity than with whether the school was a gun-free zone.

For Lanza it was attachment to a location which is the overwhelming motivator in why a place is selected time and time again in mass shootings.

Still won't stop people such as the above from the false narrative.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
Great a mother jones opinion article stating one thing. Here I'll link the opposite!

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/10/did-colorado-shooter-single-out-cinemark-theater.html

http://www.gunfaq.org/2013/04/aurora-and-the-gun-free-zone-theory/


Or just the google search I used

https://www.google.com/search?q=did...look+for+a+gun+free+theater&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8


It was noted he did zero in on theaters because they were packed, he thought with the dark screen, a costume, and a gun free area he would have a field day shooting a target dense area relatively easy and get away from doing the deed. But like most rampage killers they get wrapped up in the deed and lose track of time before the cops show. Despite the fact he tried to plan the response times of the police to various locations.

All of which goes back to my assertion that these guys PLAN out as much detail as they can before they attack. Which would include in many cases if the targets they are going after have the ability to defend themselves. Which is why if they have a target location for a specific reason for their rampage killing, they check to see if their are local security officers nearby and take them out first.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,771
54,811
136
Great a mother jones opinion article stating one thing. Here I'll link the opposite!

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/10/did-colorado-shooter-single-out-cinemark-theater.html

http://www.gunfaq.org/2013/04/aurora-and-the-gun-free-zone-theory/


Or just the google search I used

https://www.google.com/search?q=did...look+for+a+gun+free+theater&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8


It was noted he did zero in on theaters because they were packed, he thought with the dark screen, a costume, and a gun free area he would have a field day shooting a target dense area relatively easy and get away from doing the deed. But like most rampage killers they get wrapped up in the deed and lose track of time before the cops show. Despite the fact he tried to plan the response times of the police to various locations.

All of which goes back to my assertion that these guys PLAN out as much detail as they can before they attack. Which would include in many cases if the targets they are going after have the ability to defend themselves. Which is why if they have a target location for a specific reason for their rampage killing, they check to see if their are local security officers nearby and take them out first.

You said it was "confirmed" that Holmes picked his location because it was a gun free zone. While it is impossible to prove a negative, in his personal diary where he clearly listed the pros and cons of various locations gun free zones were never mentioned, indicating that he did not consider them as a pro or a con.

You said it was "confirmed". Where did you get this information from, specifically?