View Full Version : 2 wounded at Family Research Council headquarters shooting in Northwest DC
http://washingtonexaminer.com/shooting-at-family-research-council-office-in-dc/article/2504989
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/crime-scene/post/morning-shooting-in-northwest-dc/2012/08/15/845fe926-e6ec-11e1-8f62-58260e3940a0_blog.html
Clearly a failure of D.C.'s draconian gun laws to become self-aware, omniscient, omnipotent, and prevent this from happening. /s
At least it happened in DC, which outside of Chicago or NY has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, so they can't easily blame this on lax gun laws.
Also, it happened near/at a conservative organization, so expect little to no outcry from the leftists.
Guys is it me or is this starting to parallel the 2001 (I think that was the year) summer shark scare?
Reporters went on a tear that year about shark attacks. I remember this quite well b/c the first report was of a bull shark attack in Gulf Breeze. A beach in Pensacola*that I had swam at just a week before the attack.
After that attack it seemed to everyone that shark attacks were on the rise and everyone in the media was trying to figure out why. When the dust had settled researchers had discovered there wasn't an increase in attacks that year. The media had just latched onto the first story and subsequent attacks were more widely reported.
Not to take away from any of the shootings that've happened lately but in a year of presidential election the timing couldn't be more perfect for the media to drum up another scare to benefit Obama. I posted in another thread (can't remember which one) that the media would go ape crazy if there was a shooting close to the election. Unfortunately that is becoming true.
So is this just hype? Local events with more national coverage or is there truly a rise in shootings? More specifically, a rise in multiple victim shootings.
-Jax
LOL, I looked on CNN an hour or so ago and this was nowhere to be found. Foxnews had a small window on it. F'ing lefties.
Guys is it me or is this starting to parallel the 2001 (I think that was the year) summer shark scare?
Reporters went on a tear that year about shark attacks. I remember this quite well b/c the first report was of a bull shark attack in Gulf Breeze. A beach in Pensacola*that I had swam at just a week before the attack.
After that attack it seemed to everyone that shark attacks were on the rise and everyone in the media was trying to figure out why. When the dust had settled researchers had discovered there wasn't an increase in attacks that year. The media had just latched onto the first story and subsequent attacks were more widely reported.
Not to take away from any of the shootings that've happened lately but in a year of presidential election the timing couldn't be more perfect for the media to drum up another scare to benefit Obama. I posted in another thread (can't remember which one) that the media would go ape crazy if there was a shooting close to the election. Unfortunately that is becoming true.
So is this just hype? Local events with more national coverage or is there truly a rise in shootings? More specifically, a rise in multiple victim shootings.
-Jax
The msm was silent memorial day weekend with multiple shootings in Chicago. Its all in reporting, I mean spinning. City x has had a drop in shootings and city y has has an increase due to lax laws. What they dont say is city x dropped from 1500 to 1200 and city y went from 50 to 60. Taken direct from the Brady brunch awhile back of their spinning.
Drudge reports:
"REPORT: Gunman posed as intern, carried bag from CHICK-FIL-A..."
http://nation.foxnews.com/family-research-council/2012/08/15/wounded-family-research-council-headquarters-shooting
A suspect in the shooting of a security guard at the headquarters of a downtown D.C. conservative Christian lobbying firm criticized the group's anti-gay stance before opening fire, a source tells ABC7.
"Motivated by hate?"
http://www.wjla.com/articles/2012/08/chinatown-shooting-leaves-two-wounded-78851.html
Drudge reports:
"REPORT: Gunman posed as intern, carried bag from CHICK-FIL-A..."
http://nation.foxnews.com/family-research-council/2012/08/15/wounded-family-research-council-headquarters-shooting
"Motivated by hate?"
http://www.wjla.com/articles/2012/08/chinatown-shooting-leaves-two-wounded-78851.html
Nope not a hate crime!
Come now, you know the hate crime street is only "one way" :rolleyes:
Moose-Knuckle
08-15-12, 17:16
"Motivated by hate?"
http://www.wjla.com/articles/2012/08/chinatown-shooting-leaves-two-wounded-78851.html
The FRC is no stranger to controversy, even labeled by the Southern Povery Law Center as a hate group because of its stance against homosexuality.
And there we have it, a proponent of the homosexual agenda who apparently also wished to send a message with his Chic-Fil-A bag shot up a pro-family center. Hate crime at its core though we all know how the left dodges their own tactics when thrown in their face.
Mauser KAR98K
08-15-12, 17:49
Is this what the left wants: gun free zones so their fringe followers can go and murder unarmed conservatives?
Care to bet this guy's on the SPLC mailing list?
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-files/groups/family-research-council
Moose-Knuckle
08-16-12, 19:16
Is the Family Research Council shooting a hate crime?
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/family-research-council-shooting-hate-crime-210123530.html
Mauser KAR98K
08-16-12, 19:22
Is the Family Research Council shooting a hate crime?
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/family-research-council-shooting-hate-crime-210123530.html
Ah, yes. Next question?
Was the South Poverty Law Center guilty of this?
Moose-Knuckle
08-16-12, 19:41
Ah, yes. Next question?
Ah but dit you see this little tid bit.
Jack Levin, a sociology and criminology professor at Northeastern University who has written books about hate crimes, tells Yahoo News that he thinks it would be hard to argue that Corkins was targeting the group for their religion, rather than for their political beliefs, based on the facts. The federal hate crime statute doesn't include political beliefs in its list of protected categories.
How convenient right? :rolleyes:
But there is hope yet. . .
However, the District of Columbia is one of a few localities that includes political beliefs in its hate crime statute, according to an analysis by Yahoo News' own Chris Wilson. (In Washington, "race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibility, physical disability, matriculation, or political affiliation" are all in the definition of a bias-related crime.)
Now if they can get this oxygen thief on a hate crime for targeting the FRC's "political affiliation" then they sure as hell can go after the New Black Panther Party for yet another election where they are threating Republicans with racial violence.
Ah but dit you see this little tid bit.
How convenient right? :rolleyes:
But there is hope yet. . .
Now if they can get this oxygen thief on a hate crime for targeting the FRC's "political affiliation" then they sure as hell can go after the New Black Panther Party for yet another election where they are threating Republicans with racial violence.
It's DC, so I'm assuming the DoJ would have to do the prosecuting? If so, that ain't gonna happen. :rolleyes:
Mauser KAR98K
08-17-12, 01:51
Ah but dit you see this little tid bit.
How convenient right? :rolleyes:
But there is hope yet. . .
Now if they can get this oxygen thief on a hate crime for targeting the FRC's "political affiliation" then they sure as hell can go after the New Black Panther Party for yet another election where they are threating Republicans with racial violence.
So, then, do we classified this as a domestic terrorist attack, or a hate crime, or both.
The Four Motivations of Terrorism:
Money
Ideology
Creation
Ego
What are the motivation of a hate crime? Is it just racism?
Moose-Knuckle
08-17-12, 01:59
So, then, do we classified this as a domestic terrorist attack, or a hate crime, or both.
From the article I posted above the DOJ could go after this guy for "terrorism" and DC could go after him for a "hate crime".
"It's possible then that D.C. could charge Corkins with a hate crime, while on the federal level, authorities charge him with domestic terrorism, which is specifically directed at politically motivated crimes."
What are the motivation of a hate crime? Is it just racism?
"However, the District of Columbia is one of a few localities that includes political beliefs in its hate crime statute, according to an analysis by Yahoo News' own Chris Wilson. (In Washington, "race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age, marital status, personal appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, family responsibility, physical disability, matriculation, or political affiliation" are all in the definition of a bias-related crime.")
Belmont31R
08-17-12, 02:37
Propaganda is one of perhaps the most useful tool in political activism.
So there isn't a single right leaning perspective on cable or OTA news with a right bent.
Yes I know theres people who consider MSNBC to be right leaning.
If you look at the EVENTS that have happened...Fox News is a sham.
Propaganda is one of perhaps the most useful tool in political activism.
So there isn't a single right leaning perspective on cable or OTA news with a right bent.
Yes I know theres people who consider MSNBC to be right leaning.
If you look at the EVENTS that have happened...Fox News is a sham.
This seems to be more of domestic terrorism case to me. The FBI is already investigating it as such, so I'm cautiously optomistic that he'll get federal charges. However, I have no problem with DC going after this guy for a hate crime if possible.
As for the media, FNC seems to be doing a good job covering it. I heard it as background noise on Special Report, The Factor, and Hannity while I completed some projects around the house. Generally, I say that FNC is right-leaning with a few more conservative pundents than liberal. I never watch CNN or MSLSD so I can't speak to those outlets.
Littlelebowski
08-17-12, 09:17
And there we have it, a proponent of the homosexual agenda who apparently also wished to send a message with his Chic-Fil-A bag shot up a pro-family center. Hate crime at its core though we all know how the left dodges their own tactics when thrown in their face.
I've only talked to three homosexuals about this but they were fairly horrified at this incident.
I've only talked to three homosexuals about this but they were fairly horrified at this incident.
I wasn't aware that the "homosexual agenda" equates with "any and all homosexuals". :confused: Perhaps you aren't aware of the difference.
Littlelebowski
08-17-12, 09:42
I wasn't aware that the "homosexual agenda" equates with "any and all homosexuals". :confused: Perhaps you aren't aware of the difference.
Yeah, I need enlightenment as to the homosexual agenda and you appear to be an authority on the subject.
Based on your attitude, it doesn't sound like you want to understand, so whatever floats your boat, bud.
Littlelebowski
08-17-12, 09:46
Based on your attitude, it doesn't sound like you want to understand, so whatever floats your boat, bud.
I just have a sneaking suspicion amounting to a terrible certainty that there is no united "homosexual agenda" other than to be left the **** alone and have the same rights as heterosexuals but I bow to your superior knowledge, bud.
See, you're introducing the word "united" so as to argue against something different than what was stated.
And most people, be they hetero or homo, do indeed want to be left the hell alone. That's a red herring unrelated to what was being stated.
There is a clear agenda set forth by homosexual activists. If you read some of their statements you would be aware of that fact.
They are a subset of the whole. So unless you're actually arguing that this fellow represents homosexuals as a whole, versus the activist extreme within the whole, not sure what your problem is with his statement?
Littlelebowski
08-17-12, 09:55
I had assumed that "homosexual agenda" meant a majority consensus as opposed to say, one of many homosexual agendas. Imagine my embarrassment at being corrected so publicly! Are there any other homosexual agendas you are discussing? How many are there total?
I had assumed that "homosexual agenda" meant a majority consensus as opposed to say, one of many homosexual agendas. Imagine my embarrassment at being corrected so publicly! Are there any other homosexual agendas you are discussing? How many are there total?
Are you actually arguing that this fellow represents homosexuals as a whole, versus the activist extreme within the whole? If not, not sure what your problem is with his statement, since he didn't claim this fellow represented all homosexuals. In fact, I'm not sure anyone here believes that, but that's the strawman you seem really intent on arguing against.
Littlelebowski
08-17-12, 10:08
I don't think this guy was representing homosexuals as a whole nor the "activist fringe" of which there are many and you still haven't clarified which homosexual activist fringe.
The original statement I replied to said "the homosexual agenda." Singular, not plural.
Hope that wasn't too coy.
I don't think this guy was representing homosexuals as a whole nor the "activist fringe" of which there are many and you still haven't clarified which homosexual activist fringe.
The original statement I replied to said "the homosexual agenda." Singular, not plural.
Hope that wasn't too coy.
I would distinguish between the homosexual agenda and "militant" gay rights organizations. The homosexual agenda goes beyond civil rights, and are efforts to make homosexuality part of the mainstream culture in America as an equal to heterosexuality (usually directed at adolescent and younger children in public schools). Examples of this would be the appearance of pre-school books about homosexuality (i.e. Jayne Has Two Mommies) and adolescent sexual education classes that go into graphic detail of sex acts. Interestingly, some of the more important players in the homosexual agenda are not necessarily gay such as former SF mayor Gavin Newsome.
On the other hand, militant gay groups are drawn from the modern anarchist movement (New Black Panthers, Occupy Wall St., etc.) The most pervasive is Bash Back! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bash_Back!) Their MO is to disrupt private meetings, church services, and businesses that espouse traditional values.
Moose-Knuckle
08-17-12, 16:35
I would distinguish between the homosexual agenda and "militant" gay rights organizations. The homosexual agenda goes beyond civil rights, and are efforts to make homosexuality part of the mainstream culture in America as an equal to heterosexuality (usually directed at adolescent and younger children in public schools). Examples of this would be the appearance of pre-school books about homosexuality (i.e. Jayne Has Two Mommies) and adolescent sexual education classes that go into graphic detail of sex acts. Interestingly, some of the more important players in the homosexual agenda are not necessarily gay such as former SF mayor Gavin Newsome.
On the other hand, militant gay groups are drawn from the modern anarchist movement (New Black Panthers, Occupy Wall St., etc.) The most pervasive is Bash Back! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bash_Back!) Their MO is to disrupt private meetings, church services, and businesses that espouse traditional values.
Yeah, this pretty much hits the "X"-ring.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.