domestic terrorism/tragedy: florida nightclub shooting

Quintin_Stone wrote:

MattDaddy, being contacted by the FBI is pretty vague. Is there evidence that Omar broke federal law and the FBI ignored it?

None that I know of. But multiple contacts for unrelated incidents seem like some red flags would have been raised somewhere before it got to this point.

Farscry wrote:

I really appreciate how calmly and effectively you communicated this. I am so unbelievably livid over the vile victim-blaming being directed at Salman (edit: not limited to this thread; my offline experience is impacting this too) that I simply can't comment constructively. I wonder how many of the armchair moralizers would fail the standards they espouse if they were under similar duress.

Are you saying my post was vile? I thought my communication was pretty calm as well.

Abu5217 wrote:

Thank you Yonder. Thank you.

Every legal gun owner is a good guy with a gun, until they are a bad guy with a gun.

Unless I am mistaken, nearly every mass shooting event (the "famous" ones, at least) was carried out with legally purchased firearms, with the exception of Sandy Hook, where the shooter first murdered his mother, then took her (legal) guns to commit his crimes.

For what it's worth, the "mass shootings" maps and statistics that I've been seeing tend to incorporate things like Chicago gang shootings with 4+ victims. Some of those guns are legally obtained, but many are, for example, illegally transferred from lawful owner to a relative who they thinks needs to be able to protect themself.

Farscry wrote:
bekkilyn wrote:

My guess is that she sincerely feared for her life and especially the life of her child from this man, and he had her so worn down as to be convinced that if she talked to anyone, he would torture and/or kill her/the child. Abusers have this way of making their victims seem very isolated and so they aren't always able to think and make decisions rationally. Not when they are under such constant emotional and physical duress. It's a lot easier for those of us on the outside to decide what she "should" have done.

I really appreciate how calmly and effectively you communicated this. I am so unbelievably livid over the vile victim-blaming being directed at Salman (edit: not limited to this thread; my offline experience is impacting this too) that I simply can't comment constructively. I wonder how many of the armchair moralizers would fail the standards they espouse if they were under similar duress.

I guess I was thinking that the 50 people shot to death were the actual victims.

Quintin_Stone wrote:
Farscry wrote:
bekkilyn wrote:

My guess is that she sincerely feared for her life and especially the life of her child from this man, and he had her so worn down as to be convinced that if she talked to anyone, he would torture and/or kill her/the child. Abusers have this way of making their victims seem very isolated and so they aren't always able to think and make decisions rationally. Not when they are under such constant emotional and physical duress. It's a lot easier for those of us on the outside to decide what she "should" have done.

I really appreciate how calmly and effectively you communicated this. I am so unbelievably livid over the vile victim-blaming being directed at Salman (edit: not limited to this thread; my offline experience is impacting this too) that I simply can't comment constructively. I wonder how many of the armchair moralizers would fail the standards they espouse if they were under similar duress.

I guess I was thinking that the 50 people shot to death were the actual victims.

Is there a reason both can not be victims of this guy?

MattDaddy wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

MattDaddy, being contacted by the FBI is pretty vague. Is there evidence that Omar broke federal law and the FBI ignored it?

None that I know of. But multiple contacts for unrelated incidents seem like some red flags would have been raised somewhere before it got to this point.

I mean, multiple investigations and actual convictions for domestic violence weren't enough to stop him from getting guns. What would one more call have been?

Baron Of Hell wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

I guess I was thinking that the 50 people shot to death were the actual victims.

Is there a reason both can not be victims of this guy?

Apparently it doesn't count unless she was shot to death.

I haven't really collected my thoughts in one place. I've largely just been retweeting things I agree with, and lists of the victims.

But so many people commenting here don't know what it is to live in fear. It's so pervasive and common that it lies underneath everything you do. You become accustomed to it, like living too close to a highway - you know it's still there and that it's making noise, but it becomes part of your life. The sound of cars and trucks as they rumble past, tires on concrete, a familiar noise. So familiar that its absence feels more strange to you than its presence. You fall asleep to it at night. The irregular rhythm sometimes wakes you up, but nothing is going to keep it from coming through the walls, and your fatigue gets the better of you anyway.

I've not dated very much, but when I have, there are automatic... postures, and distances, we keep in public. No physical contact. Plenty of space between us. We're in Northeast Ohio, it's gun happy and very Catholic. Don't tempt anyone. Don't give them a reason to notice you. In the grocery store, one of you carries the basket, the other walks alongside. Be nonchalant. Conversation is casual. On a hiking trail, only show physical affection, like a hug, or holding hands, when no one else is in view. As soon as someone appears, deatch. Be safe. Only show affection in private, or in places where you know you can be safe - like a gay bar or night club. Even then, when leaving the club, check your four corners. Don't walk alone. These places are relatively private inside, but not secret outside. And the worst part is, I feel ashamed every time I react this way, but rarely is it a one-sided act. Whoever I'm with does the same thing.

Orlando doesn't make me frightened. I'm already frightened. This country carries a very odd duality that is invisible if you're outside, looking in - Somehow there's a widespread perception that gay people are supported, accepted, equal. It doesn't look that way if you're looking hard enough. Gay. Trans. Bi. Gender nonbinary. A sexual minority. All are still in danger.

Lots of people feel good about supporting equality - the equivalent of throwing a penny in a fountain with the knowledge that those pennies are collected to help the poor. Pennies in fountains can help. But they will never amount to ending homelessness, or poverty.

Gun control can change some factors. They're necessary factors to change. But gun control itself is not going to solve the problem. Not to downplay or shift the blame away from widely available assault weapons, but plenty of violent crimes, I'd wager most of them, against LGBTQ individuals are done with fists and feet. Yes, we need gun control. We also need education. Familiarity. An end to demonization of the unfamiliar. An end to fear. We're here, we're queer, and we're harmless. Get used to it. Stop being afraid of us so we don't have to be afraid of you.

If I kiss another man in public, it does nothing to you. Your discomfort is misplaced. Look away, and maybe think about the first time, or any time, you were in love.

If a TV show makes a gay/bi/trans character a feature, either quietly watch something else, or just keep watching and learn something (and hope the portrayal is respectful, because that sure as hell isn't guaranteed).

If two men or two women get married, take a minute to think about your own wedding vows, or the hopes you have if you're single, and realize that the goal and love there is the same.

If laws protecting equal opportunity in employment & housing perturb you, think about that time you landed your first real job; the job that let you rent your first apartment, or buy your own home. Take some attribute of yourself - hair, eye, or skin color, height, weight, age, ability, religion - and try to justify any of those as a basis for firing you or denying you a lease or mortgage.

If you live in this country, chances are pretty good you are descended from immigrants, and many such groups had slurs applied to them. Think about those slurs and how silly they are. How they're simply meant as weapons made of words, intended to hurt and discredit you as a fellow human being. Think about that the next time you utter any slur of any kind for any group.

"Changing hearts and minds" is a tired catch-phrase at this point. But it's what most needs to happen. It's really hard to accomplish when people like Omar Mateen are taught to hate themselves. In a culture where a kiss, character, wedding, fair treatment, and respect are considered a bit too much to offer, the small, disapproving cough at the mountaintop that starts an avalanche which collects people like him.

Quintin_Stone wrote:
Farscry wrote:
bekkilyn wrote:

My guess is that she sincerely feared for her life and especially the life of her child from this man, and he had her so worn down as to be convinced that if she talked to anyone, he would torture and/or kill her/the child. Abusers have this way of making their victims seem very isolated and so they aren't always able to think and make decisions rationally. Not when they are under such constant emotional and physical duress. It's a lot easier for those of us on the outside to decide what she "should" have done.

I really appreciate how calmly and effectively you communicated this. I am so unbelievably livid over the vile victim-blaming being directed at Salman (edit: not limited to this thread; my offline experience is impacting this too) that I simply can't comment constructively. I wonder how many of the armchair moralizers would fail the standards they espouse if they were under similar duress.

I guess I was thinking that the 50 people shot to death were the actual victims.

That doesn't preclude Salman being a victim of Mateen's as well. His ex-wife says Mateen physically and emotionally abused her and isolated her from her friends and family. She only managed to get away because her family came and took her. It's pretty likely he did the same thing to Salman which would go quite a ways to explaining why she didn't go to anyone about Mateen's plan. It doesn't excuse it, but it's certainly a mitigating circumstance.

Wondering why the whole domestic violence aspect of this atrocity is not really being discussed.

How the hell did a serial wife beater get a gun?

Paleocon wrote:

Wondering why the whole domestic violence aspect of this atrocity is not really being discussed.

How the hell did a serial wife beater get a gun?

No conviction.

NSMike wrote:

Somehow there's a widespread perception that gay people are supported, accepted, equal. It doesn't look that way if you're looking hard enough. Gay. Trans. Bi. Gender nonbinary. A sexual minority. All are still in danger.

I don't understand how anyone could maintain the perception even before this latest abhorrent hate crime that the LGBT+ community is safe.

Farscry wrote:
NSMike wrote:

Somehow there's a widespread perception that gay people are supported, accepted, equal. It doesn't look that way if you're looking hard enough. Gay. Trans. Bi. Gender nonbinary. A sexual minority. All are still in danger.

I don't understand how anyone could maintain the perception even before this latest abhorrent hate crime that the LGBT+ community is safe.

You say this in a country where Donald Trump is a presidential nominee for a major party. There are plenty of people out there who think they gays have earned their equality as of last June, and that it's over.

Demosthenes wrote:
MattDaddy wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

MattDaddy, being contacted by the FBI is pretty vague. Is there evidence that Omar broke federal law and the FBI ignored it?

None that I know of. But multiple contacts for unrelated incidents seem like some red flags would have been raised somewhere before it got to this point.

I mean, multiple investigations and actual convictions for domestic violence weren't enough to stop him from getting guns. What would one more call have been?

Don't know. We do know what the result of not calling was.

NSMike wrote:
Farscry wrote:
NSMike wrote:

Somehow there's a widespread perception that gay people are supported, accepted, equal. It doesn't look that way if you're looking hard enough. Gay. Trans. Bi. Gender nonbinary. A sexual minority. All are still in danger.

I don't understand how anyone could maintain the perception even before this latest abhorrent hate crime that the LGBT+ community is safe.

You say this in a country where Donald Trump is a presidential nominee for a major party. There are plenty of people out there who think they gays have earned their equality as of last June, and that it's over.

Well yeah, I know that, I'm just saying I can't understand how one can hold that viewpoint. Much like those who claimed that racism wasn't a problem anymore because we elected a black president.

Farscry wrote:

Well yeah, I know that, I'm just saying I can't understand how one can hold that viewpoint. Much like those who claimed that racism wasn't a problem anymore because we elected a black president.

Privilege, that's how.

Farscry wrote:
Baron Of Hell wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

I guess I was thinking that the 50 people shot to death were the actual victims.

Is there a reason both can not be victims of this guy?

Apparently it doesn't count unless she was shot to death.

She may have been a victim, but she can also share in some of the responsibility.

I say "may" because I have not seen any evidence that she was abused or scared for her or her son's life. Based on his history is it likely she was abused, but let's not jump to all kinds of assumptions like "he threatened her life if she told" until there is some proof.

Paleocon wrote:

Wondering why the whole domestic violence aspect of this atrocity is not really being discussed.

How the hell did a serial wife beater get a gun?

Paleocon wrote:

Wondering why the whole domestic violence aspect of this atrocity is not really being discussed.

How the hell did a serial wife beater get a gun?

Because the law is such that someone has to be convicted of “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” or their partners have to slap them with certain domestic violence protective orders before they're not able to purchase firearms.

And even then many states don't bother confiscating the firearms the abuser has already purchased (yet another in the long list of reasons we need a national database) and judges seem to be very hesitant to confiscate firearms even in cases where the defendant threatened to use a gun.

Given what we know about domestic violence, the law should be changed so that convictions aren't required. If the police are called multiple times to a household for domestic disturbances then everyone knows what's eventually going to happen.

But we live in America and an angry, emotionally stunted man's right to have a gun somehow trumps his partner's right not to get injured or murdered by him.

Yesterday I tried to run to the grocery store a few blocks from my house to get something for lunch. I say tried because the entire complex the store was in was locked down by police. And it was locked down because some f*cking idiot ex-husband decided it made a whole lot of sense to get his gun, stalk his ex-wife, and shoot her five times while she was walking her pet. There are no "good guys with guns." There are only people who haven't done something horrible with their guns yet.

MattDaddy wrote:
Farscry wrote:
Baron Of Hell wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

I guess I was thinking that the 50 people shot to death were the actual victims.

Is there a reason both can not be victims of this guy?

Apparently it doesn't count unless she was shot to death.

She may have been a victim, but she can also share in some of the responsibility.

I say "may" because I have not seen any evidence that she was abused or scared for her or her son's life. Based on his history is it likely she was abused, but let's not jump to all kinds of assumptions like "he threatened her life if she told" until there is some proof.

Assuming she was threaten what would proof of that look like?

MattDaddy wrote:

I say "may" because I have not seen any evidence that she was abused or scared for her or her son's life. Based on his history is it likely she was abused, but let's not jump to all kinds of assumptions like "he threatened her life if she told" until there is some proof.

"There's no evidence" is exactly what the police would've told her if she went to them with this threat, because by and large no one gives two sh*ts for women suffering from domestic abuse.

I'm just linking NSMichael's post since we skipped a page and I think it's a very important post and shouldn't get lost in the shuffle.

NSMike wrote:

I haven't really collected my thoughts in one place. I've largely just been retweeting things I agree with, and lists of the victims.

But so many people commenting here don't know what it is to live in fear. It's so pervasive and common that it lies underneath everything you do. You become accustomed to it, like living too close to a highway - you know it's still there and that it's making noise, but it becomes part of your life. The sound of cars and trucks as they rumble past, tires on concrete, a familiar noise. So familiar that its absence feels more strange to you than its presence. You fall asleep to it at night. The irregular rhythm sometimes wakes you up, but nothing is going to keep it from coming through the walls, and your fatigue gets the better of you anyway.

I've not dated very much, but when I have, there are automatic... postures, and distances, we keep in public. No physical contact. Plenty of space between us. We're in Northeast Ohio, it's gun happy and very Catholic. Don't tempt anyone. Don't give them a reason to notice you. In the grocery store, one of you carries the basket, the other walks alongside. Be nonchalant. Conversation is casual. On a hiking trail, only show physical affection, like a hug, or holding hands, when no one else is in view. As soon as someone appears, deatch. Be safe. Only show affection in private, or in places where you know you can be safe - like a gay bar or night club. Even then, when leaving the club, check your four corners. Don't walk alone. These places are relatively private inside, but not secret outside. And the worst part is, I feel ashamed every time I react this way, but rarely is it a one-sided act. Whoever I'm with does the same thing.

Orlando doesn't make me frightened. I'm already frightened. This country carries a very odd duality that is invisible if you're outside, looking in - Somehow there's a widespread perception that gay people are supported, accepted, equal. It doesn't look that way if you're looking hard enough. Gay. Trans. Bi. Gender nonbinary. A sexual minority. All are still in danger.

Lots of people feel good about supporting equality - the equivalent of throwing a penny in a fountain with the knowledge that those pennies are collected to help the poor. Pennies in fountains can help. But they will never amount to ending homelessness, or poverty.

Gun control can change some factors. They're necessary factors to change. But gun control itself is not going to solve the problem. Not to downplay or shift the blame away from widely available assault weapons, but plenty of violent crimes, I'd wager most of them, against LGBTQ individuals are done with fists and feet. Yes, we need gun control. We also need education. Familiarity. An end to demonization of the unfamiliar. An end to fear. We're here, we're queer, and we're harmless. Get used to it. Stop being afraid of us so we don't have to be afraid of you.

If I kiss another man in public, it does nothing to you. Your discomfort is misplaced. Look away, and maybe think about the first time, or any time, you were in love.

If a TV show makes a gay/bi/trans character a feature, either quietly watch something else, or just keep watching and learn something (and hope the portrayal is respectful, because that sure as hell isn't guaranteed).

If two men or two women get married, take a minute to think about your own wedding vows, or the hopes you have if you're single, and realize that the goal and love there is the same.

If laws protecting equal opportunity in employment & housing perturb you, think about that time you landed your first real job; the job that let you rent your first apartment, or buy your own home. Take some attribute of yourself - hair, eye, or skin color, height, weight, age, ability, religion - and try to justify any of those as a basis for firing you or denying you a lease or mortgage.

If you live in this country, chances are pretty good you are descended from immigrants, and many such groups had slurs applied to them. Think about those slurs and how silly they are. How they're simply meant as weapons made of words, intended to hurt and discredit you as a fellow human being. Think about that the next time you utter any slur of any kind for any group.

"Changing hearts and minds" is a tired catch-phrase at this point. But it's what most needs to happen. It's really hard to accomplish when people like Omar Mateen are taught to hate themselves. In a culture where a kiss, character, wedding, fair treatment, and respect are considered a bit too much to offer, the small, disapproving cough at the mountaintop that starts an avalanche which collects people like him.

Demyx wrote:
MattDaddy wrote:

I say "may" because I have not seen any evidence that she was abused or scared for her or her son's life. Based on his history is it likely she was abused, but let's not jump to all kinds of assumptions like "he threatened her life if she told" until there is some proof.

"There's no evidence" is exactly what the police would've told her if she went to them with this threat, because by and large no one gives two sh*ts for women suffering from domestic abuse.

"I'm sorry, ma'am, but there's nothing we can do."

bekkilyn wrote:
Demyx wrote:
MattDaddy wrote:

I say "may" because I have not seen any evidence that she was abused or scared for her or her son's life. Based on his history is it likely she was abused, but let's not jump to all kinds of assumptions like "he threatened her life if she told" until there is some proof.

"There's no evidence" is exactly what the police would've told her if she went to them with this threat, because by and large no one gives two sh*ts for women suffering from domestic abuse.

Demyx wrote:
MattDaddy wrote:

I say "may" because I have not seen any evidence that she was abused or scared for her or her son's life. Based on his history is it likely she was abused, but let's not jump to all kinds of assumptions like "he threatened her life if she told" until there is some proof.

"There's no evidence" is exactly what the police would've told her if she went to them with this threat, because by and large no one gives two sh*ts for women suffering from domestic abuse.

"I'm sorry, ma'am, but there's nothing we can do."

Please calm down ma'am, you're overreacting.

EDIT: Whoop, bekkilyn-hausered

MattDaddy wrote:

She may have been a victim, but she can also share in some of the responsibility.

I say "may" because I have not seen any evidence that she was abused or scared for her or her son's life. Based on his history is it likely she was abused, but let's not jump to all kinds of assumptions like "he threatened her life if she told" until there is some proof.

Guilty until proven innocent, huh?

bekkilyn wrote:
Demyx wrote:
MattDaddy wrote:

I say "may" because I have not seen any evidence that she was abused or scared for her or her son's life. Based on his history is it likely she was abused, but let's not jump to all kinds of assumptions like "he threatened her life if she told" until there is some proof.

"There's no evidence" is exactly what the police would've told her if she went to them with this threat, because by and large no one gives two sh*ts for women suffering from domestic abuse.

Demyx wrote:
MattDaddy wrote:

I say "may" because I have not seen any evidence that she was abused or scared for her or her son's life. Based on his history is it likely she was abused, but let's not jump to all kinds of assumptions like "he threatened her life if she told" until there is some proof.

"There's no evidence" is exactly what the police would've told her if she went to them with this threat, because by and large no one gives two sh*ts for women suffering from domestic abuse.

"I'm sorry, ma'am, but there's nothing we can do."

And really, we live in a country where semi-automatic rifles designed to shoot rapidly using large magazines and bullets designed to pierce armor and tear up flesh are easily available for purchase. So what would she have wanted the police to do?

Honestly, what I find vile is every attempt to find primary blame anywhere except our asinine gun culture.

Yeah, sorry, having watched my cousin get arrested twice by fights her ex-husband started because she was the one who'd been drinking (mostly as a coping mechanism for dealing with the abuse)... I have absolutely no faith in the system that this woman speaking out would have done anything.

You want to know when the cops finally believed my cousin and expunged her record? After her ex-husband's 14 hour standoff with SWAT (he was white, so he just got gassed a few times and then arrested after pointing guns at cops for 14 hours).

After that? I don't believe this woman could have made a single difference in the world.

Demyx wrote:
MattDaddy wrote:

I say "may" because I have not seen any evidence that she was abused or scared for her or her son's life. Based on his history is it likely she was abused, but let's not jump to all kinds of assumptions like "he threatened her life if she told" until there is some proof.

"There's no evidence" is exactly what the police would've told her if she went to them with this threat, because by and large no one gives two sh*ts for women suffering from domestic abuse.

Yeah, but you know, even though she's been cooperating with police and they haven't charged her with anything yet, let's jump to all kinds of assumptions like "she shares in the responsibility" and "she can present that defense at her trial" because guilty until proven innocent.

gore wrote:

[I'll also point out that, as difficult as it is for some liberals to accept, much of the Muslim world has little respect for women's rights and women are repressed throughout. How much this has to do with Islam is debatable (it's interesting to note that Noor Salman did not wear a Hijab, which clearly marks her as not an Islamic fundamentalist), but what is not debatable is that these people's families immigrated from regions where women were horribly oppressed.

Mateen's family immigrated from Afghanistan, a region rife with child brides and known to be one of the worst places in the world for women to live, even before we went in and messed it up even more. His wife, Noor Salman, is of Palestinian descent (although it is not clear to me whether she was second generation), a region in which women fare marginally better than Afghanistan (hey, they can vote there now!) but one which is still thoroughly regressive.

None of this is to say that these people are trapped by their heritage and unable to overcome it, but at best they're one generation removed from a culture where women were essentially viewed as property. This is on top of the various economic and social pressures still present in American society that oppress women and make them feel subservient to their husbands.

It's easy to imagine a scenario in which she felt completely trapped and unable to do anything.

(Aside: when I hit quote, I got the ultra-rare quintuple quote)

gore, I have to call you out on the majority of your post, as it is not based on facts of any sort. What are your sources for your statements as to how women are treated in "much of the Muslim world"?

I will share mine: I have over 400 relatives in Palestine, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar and Egypt. Western views on how women are treated in these countries are greatly influenced by outside forces. I can assure you that, while there are certainly gender roles that we would look askance at, women are by and large celebrated by the men in their lives. Now, I will give you Saudi Arabia, and I don't know enough about Afghanistan to comment on it. However, please remember that the Muslim world is not limited to Middle Eastern countries. There are quite a few Muslim nations who have elected women to high (or the highest) office.

Are there areas where atrocities are committed against women? Absolutely. Are women as empowered publicly as men? No, they are not. But to make the blanket claim that the region has "little respect for women's rights and women are repressed throughout" or that they live in "a culture where women were essentially viewed as property" is simply not the case across the board anymore.

Demyx wrote:
bekkilyn wrote:
Demyx wrote:
MattDaddy wrote:

I say "may" because I have not seen any evidence that she was abused or scared for her or her son's life. Based on his history is it likely she was abused, but let's not jump to all kinds of assumptions like "he threatened her life if she told" until there is some proof.

"There's no evidence" is exactly what the police would've told her if she went to them with this threat, because by and large no one gives two sh*ts for women suffering from domestic abuse.

Demyx wrote:
MattDaddy wrote:

I say "may" because I have not seen any evidence that she was abused or scared for her or her son's life. Based on his history is it likely she was abused, but let's not jump to all kinds of assumptions like "he threatened her life if she told" until there is some proof.

"There's no evidence" is exactly what the police would've told her if she went to them with this threat, because by and large no one gives two sh*ts for women suffering from domestic abuse.

"I'm sorry, ma'am, but there's nothing we can do."

Please calm down ma'am, you're overreacting.

I'm sure he didn't mean it and you both said things. Now why don't you go back in and apologize?