Did the FBI drop the ball on Omar Mateen?

[kage69]

Needs less liberal blinders.

Unfortunately for your ever-declining cred, it's not the liberals who are wearing the blinders (on this issue anyway).

Do you see any liberals trying desperately to equate this to voting rights, as if a ballot or the act of a single vote can be used to murder dozens of people? The disconnect there there isn't being proclaimed by the liberals as some kind of logical defense. Rather it's the NRA sycophants, who are now seeing many of their number take off the blinders and join others in calls for common sense gun control.



So yeah, project some more and act smug about it. Not fooling anyone but Drumpf supporters.

 

[Jhhnn]

He didn't need to be arrested, he needed to be tracked. A fucking gun store and Disney told them the guy was suspicious. Gee, connect the dots.

Suspicious gun buying behavior
Cases disney
Has radical ties
Been to saudi twice recently
Knows a suicide bomber (how many do you know?)
Takes classes on radicalism
Terrorized coworkers
Make many statements about killing people, including black, gays, Americans in general
His dad loves the taliban

I mean, ffs, the pattern screams jihadi

There's one reason why this wasn't pursued and it wasn't because he was a nice guy.

I haven't followed the details closely but it's reasonable that you should document such assertions, even if it's just Breitbart.

 

[LegendKiller]

Unfortunately for your ever-declining cred, it's not the liberals who are wearing the blinders (on this issue anyway).

Do you see any liberals trying desperately to equate this to voting rights, as if a ballot or the act of a single vote can be used to murder dozens of people? The disconnect there there isn't being proclaimed by the liberals as some kind of logical defense. Rather it's the NRA sycophants, who are now seeing many of their number take off the blinders and join others in calls for common sense gun control.



So yeah, project some more and act smug about it. Not fooling anyone but Drumpf supporters.

You don't think a single vote can murder dozens? Lol. A single vote can muder millions.

One man's common sense gun control is another man's inability to defend themselves from a tyrannical government. The founding fathers knew that. It's why they enumerated the states inability to eliminate that right. It is why federalist 28, 29, and 46 spoke of it, repeatedly. Why the courts have upheld it through 240 years.

 

[HomerJS]

But some find it okay to deny all citizens rights (guns) because the actions of a few.

I can't think of anyone advocating denial of all citizens guns.

 

[LegendKiller]

I haven't followed the details closely but it's reasonable that you should document such assertions, even if it's just Breitbart.

You can simply search it. Perhaps you'll get a bit more educated about the world.

It would require you to not go to vox or huffpo, but you can get out of your safe zone

 

[Jaskalas]

So we must all be disarmed. That's the only way we can be safe from terrorists and criminals intent on killing us. They obviously won't get weapons said everybody in Paris.

This fbi thing cannot be targeted and prosecuted enough. This level of failure is either prolific ineptitude and negligence, pc dominance, or purpose driven agenda.

Or FBI was following the law, which is highly restrictive so as not to snare innocent people.

 

[Artdeco]

I'm also concerned at just how many have fallen off their radar. If they're not going to monitor people, why even bother?

 

[blankslate]

But they do know since they go through background checks. It wouldn't be difficult to create a central logging system that compares background checks to prior investigations and current reports. I would be surprised if they don't already have this.

The NRA loses its collective shit when anything like background checks are mentioned.... do you think they'd let the "gungrabbing" FBI have that ability?

Can I have what you are smoking? it must be some great shit.


_____________

 

[jackstar7]

Or FBI was following the law, which is highly restrictive so as not to snare innocent people.

But he doesn't care if "those" people have their rights infringed so long as his are fine.

 

[Jhhnn]

You can simply search it. Perhaps you'll get a bit more educated about the world.

It would require you to not go to vox or huffpo, but you can get out of your safe zone

Which means that you can't back up your bullshit, obviously. I never imagined that you could.

 

[Tormac]

I only know what has been announced in the news, so I doubt that I know enough to say for sure. . .

With that in mind, I think that the FBI is damned if they do and damned if they don’t.

From what I understand Mateen did not actually break any laws until he when nuts and shot up the club. The closest thing that he did to a felony was physical abuse of his wife when they were married, and apparently he was not charged with the crime (or at least convicted). I am sure there are a lot of people who would not want to be locked up on the say so of their ex. He was on the watch list, but who knows what it takes to get on that list?

Unfortunately it seems like he did not actually do anything that would justify his arrest until he shot up the club. If the FBI starts rounding up everyone suspected of something without actually doing anything, we are going to have to fence off a large mid-western state to hold them all.

With hind sight it is easy to say that the FBI should have known, but it seems really iffy to me.

 

[LegendKiller]

Which means that you can't back up your bullshit, obviously. I never imagined that you could.

Which means that whether I put the onus on you or me, you'll ignore it anyway. I never expect anything different from you, so why bother?

 

[Jhhnn]

You don't think a single vote can murder dozens? Lol. A single vote can muder millions.

One man's common sense gun control is another man's inability to defend themselves from a tyrannical government. The founding fathers knew that. It's why they enumerated the states inability to eliminate that right. It is why federalist 28, 29, and 46 spoke of it, repeatedly. Why the courts have upheld it through 240 years.

Please. The intent of militias was to defend our govt w/o having a standing military. Tyrannical govt was that of divine right & the nobility. That's why we wrote a Constitution & added the Bill of Rights. The notion that our own govt would become tyrannical was absurd at the time & remains so today. It was also a frontier society with hostile primitives & dangerous predators that needed to be dealt with.

The last time a buncha fools convinced themselves to the contrary was the Civil War, when the tyranny of slavery wasn't tyranny at all but suppression of it would be.

It's obvious that you engage in similar mental gymnastics to justify whatever you want.

 

[Indus]

I don't feel that they did. In my estimation there wasn't enough evidence out there to indicate he was more than your average asshole.

That's how I feel too.

But I keep having an epiphany about this guy... I'm part of the LGBT community.. the first thing my friends said before knowing anything about him outside of his picture was that he looks gay and that was before the gay dating sites info came out.. maybe he had some passive aggressive resentment about being gay inside while his culture wouldn't permit him to be thanks to his dad.

Then I saw videos of his dad on TV and I remembered many US servicemen have gotten in trouble for intervening in beloved patriot/ Afghani "bachabazi" or what Jerry Sandusky would call "horseplay" but we all know what it is at this point and it's in their culture. There is 1 question I really wanna know.. did his dad molest him and create a man wanting to lash out at someone?

I've seen this kinda behavior a lot with 1 exception.. they don't go out and shoot a 100 people. Most end up being happy after finding someone that loves them but they have to come to terms with who they are first.

So I don't blame the FBI alone.. a lot of people in this are not innocent.. but I am putting the biggest blame squarely on his current wife for not calling the authorities..

 

[ivwshane]

Which means that whether I put the onus on you or me, you'll ignore it anyway. I never expect anything different from you, so why bother?

And here we go with the continuous dodges! You appear to be in a contest to out buckshat buckshot.

 

[LegendKiller]

And here we go with the continuous dodges! You appear to be in a contest to out buckshat buckshot.

Just be honest. It wouldn't matter.

 

[Jhhnn]

Which means that whether I put the onus on you or me, you'll ignore it anyway. I never expect anything different from you, so why bother?

Doesn't mean that at all. It just means that you can't back up your bullshit.

What is the one reason none of what you claim to be true wasn't pursued, anyway? Conspiracy?

 

[Exterous]

The NRA loses its collective shit when anything like background checks are mentioned.... do you think they'd let the "gungrabbing" FBI have that ability?

Most of what I see from the NRA regarding background checks is their bemoaning the shoddy and haphazard implementation of it. For example:

Mr. LaPierre said 38 states submit less than 80 percent of their felony convictions into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, leaving more than 7 million felony convictions “in the dark.”

In 2010, he said, about 80,000 prohibited people committed felonies by trying to buy guns and just 44 were prosecuted.
“Does that sound like a good number to anybody?” he asked.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jan/6/nras-lapierre-need-more-background-checks-fallacy/

They also supported a bill that would encourage better reporting:

The new legislation from Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn tries to patch some holes in the current national background checks system by encouraging states, through the promise of federal funding, to send more information on mental-health records to the national database.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/nra-supported-background-gun-check-john-cornyn-121035

Yes, they did.

I feel there was a mix of apathy as well as them having their hands tied to a degree.

Anyone really interested in this topic should go to this thread http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2456538&highlight=watch+list+guns+nra

..and look at all the regulars in there denouncing those who have a problem with terrorist suspects not being banned from purchasing guns.

Sorry but I will never support the removal of any constitutional right solely based on being put on a list with secretive qualifications, that lacks oversight, fraught with simple clerical errors and no way to distinguish between similar names. Then of course there is the opaque and lengthy restitution process that is almost a decade long in some cases to get these mistakes fixed...

 

[Brian Stirling]

Way too much of our intelligence is spying on everyone using tech. They have wonderful toys that do this automatically, but then they have to do something with all the data they harvest. And, that's the problem ... you can't run investigations on millions of people so most fall through the cracks.

So, in the end we have huge archives of data in places like Bluffdale Utah that hold world record quantities of porn and cat videos while bad guys roam the streets planning and committing horrendous crimes.



Brian

 

[blankslate]

Mr. LaPierre said 38 states submit less than 80 percent of their felony convictions into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, leaving more than 7 million felony convictions “in the dark.”

That is the states... not the FBI...

My point still stands the NRA would lose their collective shit if the FBI had that power now go suck on the NRA teats they'll keep you safe.


______________

 

[blankslate]

Way too much of our intelligence is spying on everyone using tech. They have wonderful toys that do this automatically, but then they have to do something with all the data they harvest. And, that's the problem ... you can't run investigations on millions of people so most fall through the cracks.

So, in the end we have huge archives of data in places like Bluffdale Utah that hold world record quantities of porn and cat videos while bad guys roam the streets planning and committing horrendous crimes.

Actually they probably have enough data collected to identify firearms owners by the things they buy that are seemingly unrelated.

Remember the lady who was served up ads for baby items before she even knew she was pregnant?
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-...-target-exposed-a-teen-girls-pregnancy-2012-2


_____________

 

[werepossum]

I marked down "Need more info" But it's really looking like they did drop the ball, and badly.

Same here. But it's worth pointing out that I went to engineering school in the late 70s with a LOT of Muslims, mostly Arabs, and maybe a third or a fourth of the Arabs talked this same trash about America, Christianity and Judaism. I'm pretty sure that none of them have done anything terroristic. More assholes in the world than FBI agents.

There was also an Iranian who was one of the nicest people I've ever met, and one smokin' hot babe from Jordan. So overall, I consider it a wash. lol

 

[agent00f]

Just be honest. It wouldn't matter.

If we're being honest, you'll believe anything which backs conservative ideology. It's the same sort of deal that has religious people believing creationism or flat-earth. That's very convenient for people at the top of these ideologies, but not very useful for figuring out reality.

The reality here is this guy slipped through the cracks. Tracking 350mil people is hardly trivial, and trying to predict the future is generally impossible. The FBI had the files on him, but weren't able to piece everything together. Whether this implies incompetence or underestimates the ease of competence is a complex question nobody here is equipped to answer, irrespective of their overconfident ignorance.

The crux of what the bigots are trying to argue is that they should be focused on "dangerous" people, where dangerous is defined as not-white/christian. They possibly have a point here, since the latter is mostly focused on killing dangerous people overseas instead of FBI's domestic purview.

 

[LegendKiller]

Please. The intent of militias was to defend our govt w/o having a standing military. Tyrannical govt was that of divine right & the nobility. That's why we wrote a Constitution & added the Bill of Rights. The notion that our own govt would become tyrannical was absurd at the time & remains so today. It was also a frontier society with hostile primitives & dangerous predators that needed to be dealt with.

The last time a buncha fools convinced themselves to the contrary was the Civil War, when the tyranny of slavery wasn't tyranny at all but suppression of it would be.

It's obvious that you engage in similar mental gymnastics to justify whatever you want.

That is categorically false. Madison, one of the authors of the BoR, clearly intended, as seen throughout the Federalist Papers, that the Militias were to fight against enemies foreign and domestic, including tyrannical governments.

From Federalist 46

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it."

So, effectively, Euros = idiots who love to be dominated and their rulers know how to do it. Make sure they can't fight back.

And what about Tench Coxe?

http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1421&context=wmborj

This notion that the founders of the US, who knew exactly the value of armed citizens, would curb the armament of citizens, is utterly fucking moronic and a complete fabrication of the left.

I am sure they sat around and said "Hey, we used common citizens with guns to take the country away from a non-representative government, so let's disarm all of the commoners, put a "militia" in state control, and hope that no government in the future would be non-representative"

How the fuck does that make any sense?

 

[Jhhnn]

That is categorically false. Madison, one of the authors of the BoR, clearly intended, as seen throughout the Federalist Papers, that the Militias were to fight against enemies foreign and domestic, including tyrannical governments.

From Federalist 46

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it."

So, effectively, Euros = idiots who love to be dominated and their rulers know how to do it. Make sure they can't fight back.

And what about Tench Coxe?

http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1421&context=wmborj

This notion that the founders of the US, who knew exactly the value of armed citizens, would curb the armament of citizens, is utterly fucking moronic and a complete fabrication of the left.

I am sure they sat around and said "Hey, we used common citizens with guns to take the country away from a non-representative government, so let's disarm all of the commoners, put a "militia" in state control, and hope that no government in the future would be non-representative"

How the fuck does that make any sense?

You rarely make sense- that's a given.

Nowhere have I suggested that the American people be disarmed. That's a red herring.

At issue is the notion that armed resistance against tyrannical govt is more than a fantasy in our society & the notion that military style carbines are necessary to serve the bogus ends you claim are valid. What great cause would provoke such an uprising, other than a black usurper in the oval office? So-called Patriots like the Bundy militia intend what, exactly, other than to demonstrate their idiocy?

I'm sure that Mexican cartels view the govt as tyrannical & arm themselves accordingly with 5.56 carbines being their weapon of choice. Conveniently, their Yanqui neighbors make such weapons readily available. Cuz Freedumb, obviously, & cuz range toys are soooo cool until whackjobs use them for mass murder, just another easily dismissed aspect of fear based firearms ownership.