Munich Shootings

[JimC]

[NineBerry]

This guy might have stopped it if he'd had a gun instead of a beer bottle:

I would have shot him if I'd had a gun': Munich's 'balcony man' who hurled insults at 'coward' killer reveals he threw his beer bottle at murderer to try and stop rampage

Given that his beer bottle hit a glass ceiling very far off the attacker's position, it was probably best that he didn't have a gun. No one died after the incident on the park deck anyway. All victims died much earlier.

The police explained yesterday that confusion about the number of attackers and their weapons also resulted from bystanders seeing plain-clothes police officers with machine guns and thinking those were attackers. Imagine those bystanders shot at the police instead of just calling in with wrong information.

[NineBerry]

Beer usually comes in 600+ml bottles in Germany. Those are dangerous! (and plentiful there).

Usual size for beer bottles is 500ml.

[Svartalf]

what, only half lighter and not a full mass? Shame on Bavaria

[pErvinalia]

Beer usually comes in 600+ml bottles in Germany. Those are dangerous! (and plentiful there).

Usual size for beer bottles is 500ml.

That's chick sized beer. Real men drink it in bigger bottles than that.

[JimC]

Real men drink gin...

[pErvinalia]

And eat quiche.

[cronus]

Real mean drink Guinness and watch Germany from a safe distance.

[JimC]

A safe distance is from Melbourne...

[rainbow]

The police explained yesterday that confusion about the number of attackers and their weapons also resulted from bystanders seeing plain-clothes police officers with machine guns and thinking those were attackers. Imagine those bystanders shot at the police instead of just calling in with wrong information.

Stop bringing facts and logic into the argument.

You are ruining it for everyone.

[Seth]

You were not talking about morals or ethics then, where you? You were arguing that gun controls are of no use when it comes to mass shootings. I provided figures proving that Germany's gun controls work a heap better than the "shall issue" policies and others pertaining in the majority of the United States. Nice attempt to evade your fact-free claim about mass shootings.

You didn't prove anything. The reasons behind mass shootings are many and varied and have as much to do with history and culture as anything else. The availability of guns to law-abiding citizens has little to do with preventing mass shootings (or bombings, or truck-runnings-over) but has everything to do with individual rights, individual safety and the government's attitudes towards its citizens.

In Europe, citizens are disposable cogs in the socialist machine who, individual, matter not at all. So long as socialist objectives are met it doesn't matter who gets killed, where, or why. The socialist objective with respect to an armed citizenry is to disarm the citizenry so that it can neither defend itself, thus making it dependent on government for whatever degree of illusory safety might exist, and so that the citizenry cannot rise up and put down a dictatorship because they don't have the arms to do so. One objective is immediate and short term, the other is long term and somewhat abstract, right up until the people rise up and kill their enslavers.

It's a moral issue because no matter what the absolute risk to any one individual of suffering harm at the hands of an armed criminal, something which disarming law-abiding people does absolutely nothing whatever to prevent, it is more important that citizens demand that their individual right to be armed for self defense and achieve that goal than it is for government to oppress and disarm them on the specious argument that the government will do the policing and keep them safe...something that has never, ever happened anywhere on earth in recorded history.

"Make Europe Safe by Banning Guns" is pure propaganda that does not and cannot work because eventually you get a Hitler or Erdogan or Stalin or Mao or Pol Pot who rises up and becomes a tyrant and millions more people die because they were disarmed and driven into submission by the lies of the left than would have died from all the criminal attacks that might have happened.

It is not within the legitimate power of any government to disarm ANY law abiding citizen for anything other than that person's misbehavior because government cannot and will not, and legally need not provide the security that an armed citizen enjoys by being armed. Disarming a law abiding citizen is therefore an intrinsic moral wrong.

You have that one arse about face. The pure chance of getting murdered is actually increased with the easy availability of privately owned firearms. The figures prove it.

Only if you discard the 100 million people who have died from being disarmed by despots in the last century or so, which is exactly what you do, and which is intellectually dishonest and morally repugnant. Each and every one of those 100 million people died because they were first disarmed by their government on the specious argument that the government would keep them safe and that therefore they had no need to be armed.

That is a lie of monstrous proportions that you repeat every time you cite bogus statistics in support of your immoral and unethical argument. Factor in those 100 million people and the correct conclusion is exactly the opposite of what you suggest. People die at the hands of criminals and terrorists, that much is obvious. Terrorists and criminals have no problem getting weapons with which to perpetrate their crimes, that too is an obvious fact. And terrorists and criminals in the guise of government agents have killed nearly a hundred million times more people than all those killed by criminals or terrorists in the United States in its entire history.

[Seth]

This guy might have stopped it if he'd had a gun instead of a beer bottle:

I would have shot him if I'd had a gun': Munich's 'balcony man' who hurled insults at 'coward' killer reveals he threw his beer bottle at murderer to try and stop rampage

Given that his beer bottle hit a glass ceiling very far off the attacker's position, it was probably best that he didn't have a gun. No one died after the incident on the park deck anyway. All victims died much earlier.

The police explained yesterday that confusion about the number of attackers and their weapons also resulted from bystanders seeing plain-clothes police officers with machine guns and thinking those were attackers. Imagine those bystanders shot at the police instead of just calling in with wrong information.

Perhaps plain-clothes police officers ought not flash machine guns. You won't see me flashing my gun at the scene of a mass shooting except during an actual shooting encounter with the perpetrator for precisely that reason. Nobody said you get to be stupid when you carry a gun. Then again, if Germans were ubiquitiously armed as Americans are the police would be much more careful about waving guns around unless they are properly attired. Even cops shoot plain-clothes cops from time to time.

[Galaxian]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07 ... ng-centre/
It's ongoing but what are the chances it is Islamic terror again?

ZERO! See my posts here: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 5#p1669178
And here: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 5#p1669265
Now that you're (nearly?) done quibbling amongst yourselves, as was intended by your handlers, let Galaxian put the record straight. BTW, Crumple, was it just chance that you started this thread?

This, like most of these events was a false flag, & possibly also a hoax. In other words people may have been killed (like 9/11) but that's irrelevant (life is cheap & we're only livestock). Or if there were more crisis actors than the bare minimum, then they may have joined in the supposed dead. So then it would be a hoax as well. But either way, here's the evidence that the sheeple have been led by the nose, yet again:
http://presstv.com/Detail/2016/07/25/47 ... assed-CCTV
"A senior French police officer has claimed that the interior ministry “harassed” her into altering a security report from the deadly terrorist attack in Nice.
Sandra Bertin, the officer in charge of Nice's CCTV control room, told the Journal du Dimanche newspaper on Sunday that an unnamed interior ministry official contacted her after the attack and pressured her into altering her report for the night of the incident.
....
Bertin claims that she was "harassed for an hour" by the official who wanted her to detail the presence of local and national police at the fireworks event where the carnage took place.
"The national police were perhaps there, but I couldn't see them on the video," she said, adding, "He ordered me to put in (the report) the specific positions of the national police which I had not seen on the screen." "

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/07/22/nice-munich/
Embedded video from 37 minutes onwards.
"What are the odds that a guy with the background of Richard Gutjahr – married to a leading Israeli black operator – would “just happen to be there” to film the very beginning of the Nice truck attack AND today’s shooting at the Olympia Mall in Munich, Germany? Coincidence theorists will have a field day with this!

As I wrote in my latest article on the Nice attack:
"The cameraman apparently pre-placed on the balcony to film the beginning of the truck attack is German journalist and blogger named Richard Gutjahr…who just happens to be married to Israeli potentate Einat Wilf, a former Israeli Intelligence Officer in Unit 8200 who served as foreign policy advisor to Shimon Peres, strategic consultant to MacKenzie and Co. in New York, and a general partner in Core Venture Capital in Israel. In 2007 she ran for the presidency of the World Jewish Congress. (The presence of highly-placed Israelis and friends in strategic positions to film terror events is getting out of hand…we saw the same thing with the Charlie Hebdo and Brussels Airport events.)"

And now he’s right in the middle of the shooting in Munich. Jim Dean is right, you can’t make this stuff up.
Meanwhile, even as the “Anti-“Terror Unit of the French National Police has ordered the destruction of all security camera evidence for the 24 hours before and during the Nice attack (another “you can’t make this stuff up” story) ...."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-1cw5zi7SQ


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJoJmtIzMJE


Even when their noses are rubbed in dog shit with lots of clues, coincidence theorists remain blind & faithful

[Brian Peacock]

Fat lot of good all of Germany's draconian gun-control laws did.

There's a lesson there for those with more than fractional wit.

Sure.

Intentional homicide rate per 100,000 pop.: USA - 3.9 Germany - 0.9 Ratio: 4.3 to 1
Homicide by firearms rate per 100,000 pop.: USA - 3.43 Germany - 0.07 Ratio: 49 to 1
Unintentional deaths by firearms per 100,000 pop.: USA - 0.18 Germany - 0.01 Ratio: 18 to 1

And since this thread is about mass shootings in particular, here are the relevant figures from a pro-gun site.

Annual death rate from mass public shootings from January 2009 to December 2015 per million pop.: USA - 0.089 Germany - 0.023 Ratio: 3.9 to 1

So, no matter which figures you look at, there's a lesson here for those with more than fractional wit indeed: Based on the figures, gun control laws work.

But Seth's argument is sound - you can't stop people killing other people. If killer don't have guns they'll use a stick or a car or the economic system or whatever. A a gun redresses the imbalance in the souped-up game of rock, paper scissors that is life. His point is that gun control promotes random violence, that sterner gun controls in the US would increase the frequency of and casualty rate from gun incidents just as more lax gun controls in Europe would reduce the frequency and casualty rate of gun incidents. You can't argue with logic which asserts that kind of future as fact while maintaining that society isn't ordered and peaceful by common agreement but l by the application of force and/or the threat thereof.

I mean, I would trust Seth not to shoot me in the face if we were having a heated political disagreement in a coffee shop, he just maintains that it is foolish of me to do so - so I should be packing just in case.

[Hermit]

You were not talking about morals or ethics then, where you? You were arguing that gun controls are of no use when it comes to mass shootings. I provided figures proving that Germany's gun controls work a heap better than the "shall issue" policies and others pertaining in the majority of the United States. Nice attempt to evade your fact-free claim about mass shootings.

You didn't prove anything.

I did point to a correlation you are intent on ignoring, and I provided the figures for it.

It's a moral issue

If it is a moral issue, it's a costly one in terms of lives lost. I'll get to your rejoinder presently.

You have that one arse about face. The pure chance of getting murdered is actually increased with the easy availability of privately owned firearms. The figures prove it.

Only if you discard the 100 million people who have died from being disarmed by despots in the last century or so, which is exactly what you do, and which is intellectually dishonest and morally repugnant. Each and every one of those 100 million people died because they were first disarmed by their government on the specious argument that the government would keep them safe and that therefore they had no need to be armed.

You seem to be forgetting that Hitler came to power by setting up huge, private militias. The Sturmabteilung numbered 400,000 members more than a year before Hitler was appointed Chancellor, and of course out of the SA grew the SS. The latter was founded in April 1925. Together they fought the left wing militia's, such as the Rotfrontkämpferbund and anybody who opposed the NSDAP. None of them were part of any government whatsoever. Hitler, Lenin and Mao destroyed their opposition first using non-government troops, then became despots. Militias and the concomitant right to bear arms is a truly two-edged sword. Unfortunately there is no guarantee that upright, freedom loving ones will win. History provides plenty of examples where they lost, as you keep mentioning without understanding what actually happened.

That is a lie of monstrous proportions that you repeat every time you cite bogus statistics in support of your immoral and unethical argument. Factor in those 100 million people and the correct conclusion is exactly the opposite of what you suggest.

See above.

People die at the hands of criminals and terrorists, that much is obvious. Terrorists and criminals have no problem getting weapons with which to perpetrate their crimes, that too is an obvious fact. And terrorists and criminals in the guise of government agents have killed nearly a hundred million times more people than all those killed by criminals or terrorists in the United States in its entire history.

See above again.