Soldier beheaded in streets of london....

nikilis

thats not terrorism, thats a guy with a machete.

BAGHDAD — A wave of car bombings and shootings hit cities in Iraq late Sunday and on Monday, killing at least 76 people and wounding more than 250, medical and security officials said. Some news agency reports put the overall toll even higher, at 86 or more dead.

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/world/middleeast/baghdad-basra-iraq-bombings.html

no threads about that tho eh.

Terrorism
noun
1. the use of violence or threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political or religious purposes

2. systematic use of violence or intimidation to achieve some goal or make a point


.....I'm fairly certain what they did is thee literal definition of terrorism-literally. Don't even bring up a silly point like that. However unfortunate it is, collateral damage is a part of war and conflict. It's unavoidable.
In the Middle East, extremists and insurgents intentionally choreograph their attacks and whatnot in areas full of innocents so that when the US/British/etc military go to respond they end up killing civilians. Fact. This is done intentionally to make citizens in the area where the conflict is occurring resentful of said countries/militaries so the citizens will become insurgent/terrorist sympathizers.

Collateral damage in war-torn areas is unavoidable...but a barbaric attack on a citizen whose country is sitting pretty in peace? Inexcusable.

I am deeply offended and disgusted by your post.

wait, what? hmmm.... not sure if dis is serious, or troll lvl: master.

back away slowly people. no sudden moves. dont make eye contact.

"Dat" was so funny!
Great rebuttal. Good job defending and explaining your post.

If we made a thread for every time someone was killed in Iraq, I'm pretty sure the site would overload. There's a thread about an innocent man getting hacked to death by a religious fanatic in Britain because there was an innocent man hacked to death by a religious fanatic in Britain.
Please attempt to contribute something relevant.

I would try, but I think I'd find it hard to break through your extreme brainwashing. my bad for being a bit off topic. fair call. i find it funny that you think insurgents need to try to goad troops into making the locals hate them, like an invading force wouldn't be enough. there wouldn't be collateral damage if there was no war. your a citizen of a country that invades other countries, even contravening the UN. so yeh, to you massive casualties are ok, because they were "collateral damage".

life a is a life no?

MsPudding

in the end its just sad. a guy died, heinously for no reason, at the hands of what appears to be a lunatic who does not represent what I believe to be true islam in any sense.

The problem as I see it, is that what people call the 'true' religion (whether that be Islam, Christianity, Hinduism or any other organisation promoting the existence of non-existent beings) still has absolutely no place in a modern, civilised society. There's not a major religion out there which doesn't, at its heart, have discrimination and hate because the texts they're based on were written in different times by people of different values. These days people pick and choose what they want from these religious works - the radicals pick the parts that sate their psychopathic tendencies and the moderates choose to brush the unpleasant parts under the carpet and focus on what they regard as the more morally upbeat parts.

However, IMO, the bottom line is that ALL religion is pointless, regressive and dividing.

Zomoniac

Personally what I'd like is more ability to kick religious extremists out of the country if they weren't born here, to shut-down radical clerics/preachers and to haul people in for questioning a bit quicker if, like these 2 guys, they were already known to security services.

To kick religious extremists out of this country full stop. One of the attackers was a British born, Islam convert.

Like the old days when we shipped all the criminals to Australia? We've run out of empty colony land though. I think there's some room in Greenland. We should conquer it and use it as an overflow.

Dead_Darling

We don't want guns here thank you.

We don't need more innocent deaths.

It was a horrific tragedy by a couple of lunatics, we also don't need the likes of the EDL trying to capitalise on this poor mans death to escalate things into a race war.

The actions of a few do not represent the masses.

This!

ldrosophila

They can hack to death an unarmed HERO and there will be no help forthcoming for at least 20 minutes because even the police are unarmed? Astonishing.

He wasn't a hero, he was a 20yr old guy on his way back from working at the army recruitment office an unfortunately became the tragic victim of two fundamentalist nutjobs. Merely joining the military doesn't automatically make one a hero....nor, indeed, does carrying out one's duties in a theatre of war. Going above and beyond the call of duty to help others, with no regard for one's personal welfare makes one a hero.

The word 'hero' is so over-used these days it's pretty much meaningless.

Now on the gun question. It is not our culture to have open and near-unrestricted gun ownership. It's not even our culture to arm all police. That isn't going to change anytime soon as the majority of the British public, me included, don't want greater freedom to own guns. We can already own rifles if we pass police checks, obtain a licence and comply with the restrictions on usage.

Personally what I'd like is more ability to kick religious extremists out of the country if they weren't born here, to shut-down radical clerics/preachers and to haul people in for questioning a bit quicker if, like these 2 guys, they were already known to security services.

Fascinates me how much our country's philosophy differ. My first response as an American was "holy h#ll" how did this poor man almost lose his head in an urban street where was the protection? I wonder how this would have played out in the streets of America? I'm sure those men would be dead the police would have killed them. Seems the the response from most of our UK neighbors is you need to go to the source and get rid of these extremist preachers. How would that work though without encroaching on someone's religion? I hope another tragedy like this happens again.

People get killed in America all the time before the police have a chance to respond. Since police officiers are not telepathic/time travellers/clairvoyants, then a large part of the job is actually responding to things that have already happened. You don't see the irony in the high murder rate in the US and the fact that obviously the police never turned up before all those murders happened to stop them. Guess you made a bunch of stupid posts about all of those incidents, too? Jesus, you're an *kitten*.

A man has lost his life - that's a tragedy whatever way you slice it. Self righteous bollocks like this is neither helpful or constructive. We live in a system in the UK where the majority of us believe in the rule of law. People should be arrested and tried for their crimes. That's an aspect of the society I live in that makes me proud.

Why the personal attack...why cant you have a debate on the difference of philosophies without a personal attack? I dont remember calling you or anyone else derogatory terms or another country's ideals for that matter? So why did you feel that you had to use it? Seems quite immature to me.

chanel1twenty

Common Sense Doesn’t Require Statistics


I start out amused, then get frustrated, then angry, and finally absolutely resolute when I see these anti-gunners spout statistics here, there and everywhere about the dangers of guns, crime rates and the effectiveness of gun control. Bullchips!



These arguments are then most times followed from the pro-gun side by another set of endless statistics that completely counter the arguments just made by the anti-gun crowd. Unfortunately, these pro-gun statistics will never convince the anti-gunners no matter how obvious the numbers.



Nobody ever seems to believe the other guys’ statistics and there is a sound reason for that—statistics are a liar’s best friend and liars know that better than anyone.



I studied statistics in college and found that I could easily develop a long list of impressive numbers to support any argument on either side of an issue, creating virtually any impression I fancied. Politicians and the media do it all the time.



“So what good are all these statistics Colonel if we can’t use them to prove gun control just doesn’t work?”



Although statistics are good facts to have in your pocket, you really don’t need numbers to prove this point. The founders didn’t have any statistics so all you need is what they had in abundance—common sense. “What do you mean Colonel?”



Here are just 4 common sense points that illustrate why gun control is a myth, not a pathway to crime control—and not one point uses statistics.



Common Sense Point #1: Thugs ignore gun laws. To think that thugs who ignore laws against murder, robbery, rape and assault will, by some stretch of lunacy, obey gun control laws is the purest form of lunacy. Does anyone think that a gang planning a bank robbery will trash those plans because they would first be required to register their guns before the job went down?



Let’s listen in on Mugsy and Bugsy planning…The Big Heist



“Well, Bugsy, there it is. Our plans for robbing the Last National Bank are absolutely fool-proof and dat cool million is just waitin’ on us. It’s just a cryin’ shame we can’t pull it off though.”



“Why Mugsy? What do you mean?” asks Bugsy incredulously.



“Because da law says we can’t carry unregistered guns or we could get into real trouble” says Mugsy as he resigns himself to the life of a law abiding citizen.



“You’re right.” admits Bugsy with a tear in his eye. We’ll just have to forget about dat million smackers. I certainly wouldn’t want to break any gun laws.”



And who really thinks that requiring a solid citizen to register his gun will prevent crime? He isn’t planning The Big Heist—never has, never will. So the point is?



Common Sense Point #2: Thugs prefer unarmed victims and avoid potentially armed citizens. Amazing bit of deductive reasoning isn’t it? Anti-gunners hope you never discover that truth on your own. Think about it though from the shoes of Mugsy and Bugsy. Who would you rather confront, an armed citizen or an unarmed one? Where would you rather focus your life of crime? In areas where guns are outlawed or where guns are prevalent? Who would you rather prey on, the defenseless or the armed? And where is violent crime more prevalent? Washington D.C. where gun laws are strictest or Florida where gun laws are more relaxed? I’ll give you one guess but let’s listen in on Mugsy and Bugsy again.



“OK Bugsy, the bank job was a flop I admit dat, but we can always pull a stick-up like in da ol’ days.”



“Yeah, dats right Mugsy. We can always get a little fast bread dat way.” says Bugsy, his excitement for the old days of street crime growing. “But where do we target da mark Mugsy?”



Well Bugsy, we sure can’t pull stick ups in Florida, too many guns there. We might could get shot by one of dem ol’ southern boys. You know how they are. A lot of ‘em is packin’ these days since Florida OK’d concealed carry—ya just never know down there anymore—a real shame ain’t it?”



“You’re right Mugsy. That could be way too dangerous for us.” “I got it!” says Bugsy, “We’ll hit every schmuck in Washington D.C. None of dem bums got guns…it’s against the law…we’ll be the only ones there what got heaters!”



“Great idea!” says Mugsy, “Let’s load up and git goin’. Easy pickins, here we come!”



Common Sense Point #3: Crime is deviant behavior. A gun is an inanimate tool not deviant behavior and crime is deviant behavior not an inanimate tool. You can’t prevent deviant behavior by regulating tools because tools are incapable of behavior and the number of tools available to the world’s deviants is endless.



Even if you could legislate guns out of existence, deviants could, would and have used other things that gave them a power advantage over their victims—knives, clubs, rocks or even sharp sticks—all of which are very legal and very accessible.



Commons Sense Point #4: The Trump Card. The strongest point of all consists of a mere 27 words and is absolute in its nature. It trumps all statistics ever concocted by man and all arguments ever made—and not one of the 27 words is a number… “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” #4, my friends, is absolute, unambiguous and supersedes all arguments and all statistics.



Now go forth soldier, well armed with common sense, the absolute truth of the II Amendment and ready to fight the good fight.



One last note: If you ever find any staunchly committed anti-gunner actually and honestly willing to listen to common sense or interpret the II Amendment simply as written by our founders, please let me know. I’m still looking for one.



Just the view from my saddle…

Uhhh....ooookay.

Saying we "anti-gunners" don't have common sense doesn't seem very nice now does it. I never called you or your NRA buddies stupid. I've merely made jokes about their closet autoerotic-asphyxiation techniques with their firearms...and a couple harmless jokes about how they use their guns to get off by sticking the barrel of their guns up their-ya know, never mind my jokes. Just saying I've never accused you of lacking common sense. Tsk tsk.

Bottom line is, people need guns because other people have guns. There wouldn't be any gun laws for thugs to ignore if there were no guns Even in self-defense incidents, murder seems silly. Incapacitating is just as effective. Get a taser, some mace.

2nd Amendment crap is irrelevant these days. They had no idea what their muskets were gonna turn into. It's especially frightening now that a plastic gun has been created that gets by all metal-detectors.

Don't really know why I'm giving the view from my 'saddle' since I'm stupid and lack common sense.

Oh well.

None of it matters, really. When the zombies come hatchets and baseball bats will be our best bets, anyways.

Please be a peach and point out where exactly this article states that anti-gunners do not have common sense. I can't seem to find it. However, if that's the perception you get, maybe it hit the nail on the head.

To each his own....and by own I mean my 270 rifle that I will confidently put in an intruder's face when he/she breaks into my house. (I live alone.)

The founding fathers created the 2nd Amendment because they had common sense.
COMMON SENSE points for why gun control is a myth and doesn't stop crime.
If you find a staunch anti-gunner willing to listen to common sense let me know.
Go forth soldier, armed with common sense la la.

Lmao did you read any of this?? Where did you say anti-gunners lack common sense?? Lmao, seriously? Just because your post didn't say "People who are anti-gun have no common sense!" Doesn't mean your post didn't say it!


I can only hope that one day you're actually faced with the situation where you have every right to shoot and kill someone. I'd like to see you look into another human's eyes, a human that is somebody's child/sibling/parent/cousin/close friend, and consciously decide to end that person's life.
I promise it will haunt you forever. Watching someone die is intense enough and an experience I wouldn't wish on anyone...but to be the murderer? Phew. Self-defense or not, you would be a murderer and probably have to look their family in their heartbroken eyes and explain why you murdered their loved one.
All these soldiers who come back with PTSD have it because of their experience of murder.
I'd be interested to know if you'd still wanna make out with your gun if you're ever faced with that.
Have a good day. Enjoy your Fox News, peach

nikilis

in the end its just sad. a guy died, heinously for no reason, at the hands of what appears to be a lunatic who does not represent what I believe to be true islam in any sense.

The problem as I see it, is that what people call the 'true' religion (whether that be Islam, Christianity, Hinduism or any other organisation promoting the existence of non-existent beings) still has absolutely no place in a modern, civilised society. There's not a major religion out there which doesn't, at its heart, have discrimination and hate because the texts they're based on were written in different times by people of different values. These days people pick and choose what they want from these religious works - the radicals pick the parts that sate their psychopathic tendencies and the moderates choose to brush the unpleasant parts under the carpet and focus on what they regard as the more morally upbeat parts.

However, IMO, the bottom line is that ALL religion is pointless, regressive and dividing.

I agree. this thread is gonna be all kinds a locked.

__Di__

Why was the soldier alone? In my military experience, we were often in pairs or larger groups. What took the police so long? I am so sad for the soldiers family.

One of the attackers had a revolver, the police had to wait for the armed response unit. In the US it wouldn't take long as their gun laws are different, in the UK the old bill have to wait, just as well they did too, one of the attackers ran at the police with the gun, hence they shot them both.

What the attackers were armed?!?! This doesnt cause anyone for concern?

Yes of course they were armed with a machette and a revolver, well one of them was anyway with the gun.

Look for crying out loud, have 95% of the people on this thread done ANY research on this story at all or is everybody just reacting to the "have gun/have no gun" debate?

emergencytennis

Personally what I'd like is more ability to kick religious extremists out of the country if they weren't born here, to shut-down radical clerics/preachers and to haul people in for questioning a bit quicker if, like these 2 guys, they were already known to security services.

To kick religious extremists out of this country full stop. One of the attackers was a British born, Islam convert.

Please describe a process to identify religious extremists, and a legal destination for them. Catholics believe that the rights of the unborn outweigh the rights of the woman. I would put them down as religious extremists.

I would like to nominate Coochiemudlo Island as the destination for all these religious nutters. It could get a bit crowded but I don't see Campbell Newman objecting to it being excised from the Australian mainland.

MsPudding

Seems the the response from most of our UK neighbors is you need to go to the source and get rid of these extremist preachers. How would that work though without encroaching on someone's religion?

I'd say that the UK should do what the French do....essentially ignore any bits of EU legislation they don't happen to fancy and do what suits them. The French banned the wearing of the Burka and good on them - there's absolutely no reason why such a symbol of female repression should be freely tolerated.

As it is, we spent millions of public money going through endless court cases fighting European courts every time we want to deport known extremists....like Abu Hamza who wasted years of court time and public money fighting extradition to the US...whilst spewing hate and encouraging violence in the UK.

Zomoniac

Personally what I'd like is more ability to kick religious extremists out of the country if they weren't born here, to shut-down radical clerics/preachers and to haul people in for questioning a bit quicker if, like these 2 guys, they were already known to security services.

To kick religious extremists out of this country full stop. One of the attackers was a British born, Islam convert.

Please describe a process to identify religious extremists, and a legal destination for them. Catholics believe that the rights of the unborn outweigh the rights of the woman. I would put them down as religious extremists.

I would like to nominate Coochiemudlo Island as the destination for all these religious nutters. It could get a bit crowded but I don't see Campbell Newman objecting to it being excised from the Australian mainland.

Send them to Westboro, they can all have a party.

And yes, I'd say Catholics were extremists. The last Pope told the African people to not use contraception. He told a people where HIV and AIDS are rife to explicitly not do anything to protect the spread of this. How many people have died as a consequence of this utter insanity in the name of religion? We'll never know a number, but I'm guessing it's a fairly big one.

jimmmer

Why the personal attack...why cant you have a debate on the difference of philosophies without a personal attack? I dont remember calling you or anyone else derogatory terms or another country's ideals for that matter? So why did you feel that you had to use it? Seems quite immature to me.

A debate over the differences of philosophies is what rubs me up the wrong way. A man died. Horribly, I might add. This is not fuel for your intellectual fire. It's a ****!ng tragedy.

To use it as fuel for your theory that armed police in your country would have dealt with it more quickly, more competently and, for all intents and purposes, just plain better is what has aggravated me. You want to say, "Gee, we would have dealt with this so much better than you have" all the while seemingly forgetting that not 24 hours ago, a real, living, breathing human being was hacked to death by a madman with a machette.

nikilis

Seems the the response from most of our UK neighbors is you need to go to the source and get rid of these extremist preachers. How would that work though without encroaching on someone's religion?

I'd say that the UK should do what the French do....essentially ignore any bits of EU legislation they don't happen to fancy and do what suits them. The French banned the wearing of the Burka and good on them - there's absolutely no reason why such a symbol of female repression should be freely tolerated.

As it is, we spent millions of public money going through endless court cases fighting European courts every time we want to deport known extremists....like Abu Hamza who wasted years of court time and public money fighting extradition to the US...whilst spewing hate and encouraging violence in the UK.

oh, abu hamsa, now theres a recruitment advertisement for extremism if ever I saw one. An ugly blind guy with hooks for hands?

"join now and you can be just like me" - what? your an idiot who blew his hands off like some kind of scooby doo villain.

why would anyone be inspired to join the cause by that guy?

chanel1twenty

thats not terrorism, thats a guy with a machete.

BAGHDAD — A wave of car bombings and shootings hit cities in Iraq late Sunday and on Monday, killing at least 76 people and wounding more than 250, medical and security officials said. Some news agency reports put the overall toll even higher, at 86 or more dead.

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/world/middleeast/baghdad-basra-iraq-bombings.html

no threads about that tho eh.

Terrorism
noun
1. the use of violence or threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political or religious purposes

2. systematic use of violence or intimidation to achieve some goal or make a point


.....I'm fairly certain what they did is thee literal definition of terrorism-literally. Don't even bring up a silly point like that. However unfortunate it is, collateral damage is a part of war and conflict. It's unavoidable.
In the Middle East, extremists and insurgents intentionally choreograph their attacks and whatnot in areas full of innocents so that when the US/British/etc military go to respond they end up killing civilians. Fact. This is done intentionally to make citizens in the area where the conflict is occurring resentful of said countries/militaries so the citizens will become insurgent/terrorist sympathizers.

Collateral damage in war-torn areas is unavoidable...but a barbaric attack on a citizen whose country is sitting pretty in peace? Inexcusable.

I am deeply offended and disgusted by your post.

wait, what? hmmm.... not sure if dis is serious, or troll lvl: master.

back away slowly people. no sudden moves. dont make eye contact.

"Dat" was so funny!
Great rebuttal. Good job defending and explaining your post.

If we made a thread for every time someone was killed in Iraq, I'm pretty sure the site would overload. There's a thread about an innocent man getting hacked to death by a religious fanatic in Britain because there was an innocent man hacked to death by a religious fanatic in Britain.
Please attempt to contribute something relevant.

I would try, but I think I'd find it hard to break through your extreme brainwashing. my bad for being a bit off topic. fair call. i find it funny that you think insurgents need to try to goad troops into making the locals hate them, like an invading force wouldn't be enough. there wouldn't be collateral damage if there was no war. your a citizen of a country that invades other countries, even contravening the UN. so yeh, to you massive casualties are ok, because they were "collateral damage".

life a is a life no?

Uhh, where I said collateral damage is OK I can't seem to find, but ok!
Living in a country that invades other countries doesn't make ME an invader. And god knows the UK likes to follow right behind us and invade these countries.

Have you read anything about civilians sentiments toward America? While we're fighting their true enemy and giving the citizens food, schools, medical care, toiletries, laptops, etc etc. While their sons are being literally stolen away and reprogrammed to care only about what they want them to care about and put their families and own lives third and fourth to what the terrorists want them to make priority?

The US has definitely made bad decisions throughout history. But how many tyrannies have we helped get rid of? How much assistance have we given to peoples and nations in need?

I didn't say collateral damage is OK, don't put words in my mouth. I said it's UNAVOIDABLE. You're talking at me like I'm pro-war or something. Quite silly.

nikilis

Personally what I'd like is more ability to kick religious extremists out of the country if they weren't born here, to shut-down radical clerics/preachers and to haul people in for questioning a bit quicker if, like these 2 guys, they were already known to security services.

To kick religious extremists out of this country full stop. One of the attackers was a British born, Islam convert.

Please describe a process to identify religious extremists, and a legal destination for them. Catholics believe that the rights of the unborn outweigh the rights of the woman. I would put them down as religious extremists.

I would like to nominate Coochiemudlo Island as the destination for all these religious nutters. It could get a bit crowded but I don't see Campbell Newman objecting to it being excised from the Australian mainland.

Send them to Westboro, they can all have a party.

And yes, I'd say Catholics were extremists. The last Pope told the African people to not use contraception. He told a people where HIV and AIDS are rife to explicitly not do anything to protect the spread of this. How many people have died as a consequence of this utter insanity in the name of religion? We'll never know a number, but I'm guessing it's a fairly big one.

hohoh.... I can feel the cold steel of that lock a comin.

mrdexter1

Seems the the response from most of our UK neighbors is you need to go to the source and get rid of these extremist preachers. How would that work though without encroaching on someone's religion?

I'd say that the UK should do what the French do....essentially ignore any bits of EU legislation they don't happen to fancy and do what suits them. The French banned the wearing of the Burka and good on them - there's absolutely no reason why such a symbol of female repression should be freely tolerated.

As it is, we spent millions of public money going through endless court cases fighting European courts every time we want to deport known extremists....like Abu Hamza who wasted years of court time and public money fighting extradition to the US...whilst spewing hate and encouraging violence in the UK.

oh, abu hamsa, now theres a recruitment advertisement for extremism if ever I saw one. An ugly blind guy with hooks for hands?

"join now and you can be just like me" - what? your an idiot who blew his hands off like some kind of scooby doo villain.

why would anyone be inspired to join the cause by that guy?

I ll tell you why..

Because their religeon teaches them they go to a better life so they dont give a monkies about death and welcome it and thats what your government didnt understand when they stired this mess up.

Zomoniac

hohoh.... I can feel the cold steel of that lock a comin.

Give it a couple of hours. Moderation only seems to happen after 6pm UK time, I can only assume all the mods are on the US west coast.

MsPudding

Send them to Westboro, they can all have a party.

And yes, I'd say Catholics were extremists. The last Pope told the African people to not use contraception. He told a people where HIV and AIDS are rife to explicitly not do anything to protect the spread of this. How many people have died as a consequence of this utter insanity in the name of religion? We'll never know a number, but I'm guessing it's a fairly big one.

Absolutely on both points.

I'm sure there's an island somewhere that nobody's too bothered about that we can send all the nutjobs off to and they can fight it out between themselves. We could get Endomol to produce a game-show. It could replace Britain's Got Talent on the prime-time Saturday night slot!

Oh and on the Catholic Church, let's not forget that until fairly recently when they started cleaning up their financial act, they were investing in companies who dealt arms. Not to mention the decades and decades spent covering up child abuse....

Every major religion out there has fairly shameful modern history; none are exempt.

Pookylou

Why was the soldier alone? In my military experience, we were often in pairs or larger groups. What took the police so long? I am so sad for the soldiers family.

One of the attackers had a revolver, the police had to wait for the armed response unit. In the US it wouldn't take long as their gun laws are different, in the UK the old bill have to wait, just as well they did too, one of the attackers ran at the police with the gun, hence they shot them both.

What the attackers were armed?!?! This doesnt cause anyone for concern?

Yes of course they were armed with a machette and a revolver, well one of them was anyway with the gun.

Look for crying out loud, have 95% of the people on this thread done ANY research on this story at all or is everybody just reacting to the "have gun/have no gun" debate?

No why use hard facts when you can just spout anything you like? *head desk*

ldrosophila

Why the personal attack...why cant you have a debate on the difference of philosophies without a personal attack? I dont remember calling you or anyone else derogatory terms or another country's ideals for that matter? So why did you feel that you had to use it? Seems quite immature to me.

A debate over the differences of philosophies is what rubs me up the wrong way. A man died. Horribly, I might add. This is not fuel for your intellectual fire. It's a ****!ng tragedy.

To use it as fuel for your theory that armed police in your country would have dealt with it more quickly, more competently and, for all intents and purposes, just plain better is what has aggravated me. You want to say, "Gee, we would have dealt with this so much better than you have" all the while seemingly forgetting that not 24 hours ago, a real, living, breathing human being was hacked to death by a madman with a machette.

Take a class on critical thinking then when someone comes at you with an argument that you dont agree with you can learn to debate it without personal attacks.

I never stated I had a theory all I stated was how scary it was that I could be walking down the street and have someone start cutting off my head and not know when I would get help. We did have a similar attack in America not long ago this man started to eat the face of a homeless man! There was no political agenda.