Shooting at Wisconsin Sikh temple


Recommended Posts

As for the shooter, it really isn't a surprise to learn that he was a US army veteran. The US army tends to attract a very poor class of people and doesn't do enough to look after the mental health of its personnel. The US military has a terrible culture, highlighted by the recent rape scandal. And then there are the high profile scandals we've seen over recent years, from ****ing on dead bodies, to the torture of prisoners, to stripping prisoners naked for photos, etc. The US military has the worst reputation in the western world.

Things like that make the news because they are the exception, not the rule. Instances of things like that are extremely rare, considering the vast number of people in the military. As for your "poor class of people", you are EXTREMLY misinformed: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1997/07/the-widening-gap-between-military-and-society/6158/#

What? It makes perfect sense a criminal isn't going to rob or kill someone that might kill him.They always look for the easy targets. You don't have to draw a gun on everyone, simple open carry of a handgun would let any potential criminal know that you're not one to be messed with. Also concealed carry as well. Criminal comes to rob or murder you suddenly you pull out a handgun that he thought you didn't have, the odds are no longer in his favor, he either has a choice to shoot it out with you or run and most likely the criminal will run. Most people murders and robbers are not willing to die. When A gun is pulled out they tend to flee. It happens all the time in store robberies where the criminal has a gun once a second gun is introduced they tend to flee.

You mentioned rape. If someone points a gun at a woman's head, do you seriously expect her to reach into her pocket, take her gun and shoot the rapist while being threatened with a gun at point blank?

If someday a man comes into a store, graps his gun, points it at someone and asks the employees to give him money, will you seriously try to grab your gun and shoot him?

I'm quite surprised you say it happens all the time in store robberies as an argument. If you've been in multiple store robberies, how can you not admit the system has huge problems?

Say WHAT? Are you trying to claim that owning a gun makes you more likely to be a victim of a crime?

You misunderstood me. I meant to say that if you weren't able to own that gun, the criminal probably wouldn't have one either.

Most crimes committed with a gun in the US are done with guns that were illegally obtained (stolen, bought on the street, etc.) or illegally in the person's possession (convicted felon, etc.). The only gun crime where the majority of the guns are legally owned would probably be suicide (yes, that is counted as gun crime in the US).

Funny you should say that, since in this case the gun was legally obtained.

The Aurora disaster was also caused by legal weapons. (source: http://www.inquisitr.com/281617/suspect-james-holmes-was-a-legal-gun-owner-police-say/ )

More than likely, the temple was a "gun free zone", just like the theater in Colorado. That plan works really well, doesn't it?

I think people forget that gun laws only prohibit law abiding citizens and not criminals. States with CWL are statistically less likely to have gun violence, notably because you never know who's packing. You also never see gun violence erupt in establishments that allow carried weapons. A gun is a tool, and just like a scalpel can be used in the defense or sustainment of life, or to the opposite end.

You misunderstood me. I meant to say that if you weren't able to own that gun, the criminal probably wouldn't have one either.

This is a huge misconception. Criminals don't give a flying F*** about gun laws, and will obtain and use them to whatever nefarious end they have planned regardless.

Funny you should say that, since in this case the gun was legally obtained.

The Aurora disaster was also caused by legal weapons. (source: http://www.inquisitr...ner-police-say/ )

And those two incidents are the exceptions, not the rule. Which is why they make national (and international) news. If they were the common gang shooting or robbery, they wouldn't merit much more than a statement about it in the local newspaper or the nightly news.

And those two incidents are the exceptions, not the rule. Which is why they make national (and international) news. If they were the common gang shooting or robbery, they wouldn't merit much more than a statement about it in the local newspaper or the nightly news.

Quite right, the media never picks up on gang shootings where dozens are killed, or even border violence (unless they want to vilify a border patrol agent), but every one of these out of the ordinary shootings gets international attention.

Funny you should say that, since in this case the gun was legally obtained.

The Aurora disaster was also caused by legal weapons. (source: http://www.inquisitr...ner-police-say/ )

Yea, the way things are presented in Aurora it was a legal purchase, but had the proper channels been followed by his psychiatrist, and he was put on a psychiatric hold AS HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN, he would not have been able to legally purchase firearms.

It was a failure of the mental health system and enforcing the laws that they should be following with patients like him, not a failure of gun control. There are already laws on the books that mentally ill people may not possess firearms, but the mental health professional dealing with him did not do her job, nor follow the law. But lets continue to blame the firearm involved, obviously it just jumped up and pulled its own trigger right?

  • Like 1

And those two incidents are the exceptions, not the rule. Which is why they make national (and international) news. If they were the common gang shooting or robbery, they wouldn't merit much more than a statement about it in the local newspaper or the nightly news.

The sad thing is these kind of shootings in the US seem to become more of a regular occurrence.

Yea, the way things are presented in Aurora it was a legal purchase, but had the proper channels been followed by his psychiatrist, and he was put on a psychiatric hold AS HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN, he would not have been able to legally purchase firearms.

It was a failure of the mental health system and enforcing the laws that they should be following with patients like him, not a failure of gun control. There are already laws on the books that mentally ill people may not possess firearms, but the mental health professional dealing with him did not do her job, nor follow the law. But lets continue to blame the firearm involved, obviously it just jumped up and pulled its own trigger right?

What if he bought guns before he was deemed mentally ill? (Just a question)

The sad thing is these kind of shootings in the US seem to become more of a regular occurrence.

They really aren't regular at all. This one was a blatant hate crime, the Aurora shooting was mosty caused by mental health professionals not exercising due diligence. There are laws that are intended to prevent these, but they aren't always going to prevent bad things from happening. People should be ready and able to defend themselves when these situations arise, and trusting beaurocrats to make more laws to make it all go away isn't the answer.

What if he bought guns before he was deemed mentally ill? (Just a question)

If he had and was added to the system they would have been confiscated. When a mental health professional suspects a person of potentially being a danger to themselves or others, they are supposed to report it to Police, who will check for firearm purchases and remove them. This is how it's supposed to work, but when someone doesn't do their job, the gun gets the bad rap.

  • Like 1

What if he bought guns before he was deemed mentally ill? (Just a question)

I appreciate the question, its refreshing to have one asked without the outright hostility and hand wringing that seems common from a specific few here.

To answer your question:

Once deemed mentally ill, or even put on a Psychiatric hold, that individual MUST surrender their firearms, either sell to an FFL (gun store) or turn them over to Law enforcement. They are known to the federal government as a "Prohibited person" they cannot even so much as touch a round of .22LR ammo without committing a felony.

I think people forget that gun laws only prohibit law abiding citizens and not criminals. States with CWL are statistically less likely to have gun violence, notably because you never know who's packing. You also never see gun violence erupt in establishments that allow carried weapons. A gun is a tool, and just like a scalpel can be used in the defense or sustainment of life, or to the opposite end.

Texas must be an exception here. We have had CCL for quite awhile. We also have an "in plain sight" law. Doesn't seem to have abated gun crime here much at all. It's unfortunate. This is not discounting that statistically crime is down across the country as a whole.

Texas must be an exception here. We have had CCL for quite awhile. We also have an "in plain sight" law. Doesn't seem to have abated gun crime here much at all. It's unfortunate. This is not discounting that statistically crime is down across the country as a whole.

Gun crime has been steadily dropping since Texas implemented the CCL in 1995, meanwhile, gun sales have been steadily increasing. CCL holders are less likely to be arrested for a crime, violent or otherwise.

I appreciate the question, its refreshing to have one asked without the outright hostility and hand wringing that seems common from a specific few here.

To answer your question:

Once deemed mentally ill, or even put on a Psychiatric hold, that individual MUST surrender their firearms, either sell to an FFL (gun store) or turn them over to Law enforcement. They are known to the federal government as a "Prohibited person" they cannot even so much as touch a round of .22LR ammo without committing a felony.

See isn't that a problem? The guy has to willingly hand over his weapons, but say he doesn't and something like this or Aurora happens.

Also how long does the hold / deemed mentally ill hold last? I ask because my old roommate tried to commit suicide (with a knife), and he has anger issues, but then 2 years later he went and got himself a handgun (legally with the background check and all). So is it just until his psychiatrist says hes clear or like is it a set time?

See isn't that a problem? The guy has to willingly hand over his weapons, but say he doesn't and something like this or Aurora happens.

Also how long does the hold / deemed mentally ill hold last? I ask because my old roommate tried to commit suicide (with a knife), and he has anger issues, but then 2 years later he went and got himself a handgun (legally with the background check and all). So is it just until his psychiatrist says hes clear or like is it a set time?

Say he doesn't and he gets thrown in the clink. He has the option to sell them to an FFL so he can get money out of it, but he is required by law to give them up. Otherwise the police take them, forcibly if necessary.

EDIT: Sorry, I forgot to address your second part. You can't lock someone out of owning a firearm because someone implies they have anger issues. There are diagnosable criteria for anger management issues, and it is at the discretion of the mental health professional and law enforcement to determine whether he can be diagnosed and whether that diagnosis would merit confiscation and lock out of firearms, respectively.

So if he fit criteria laid out in the DSMIV it would be up to police to determine his eligibility for firearm purchase.

Because many people attempt suicide for many different reasons, It is customary for a person to be held for no more than 72 hours after an attempt or report (Baker Act in Florida, has different names everywhere). Once they've been cleared by a mental health professional, who may reccomend further treatment, they would be free to own firearms. I'm sure if I'm off on any of this it will be clarified by the many smart people here who watch these topics.

They really aren't regular at all. This one was a blatant hate crime, the Aurora shooting was mosty caused by mental health professionals not exercising due diligence. There are laws that are intended to prevent these, but they aren't always going to prevent bad things from happening. People should be ready and able to defend themselves when these situations arise, and trusting beaurocrats to make more laws to make it all go away isn't the answer.

If he had and was added to the system they would have been confiscated. When a mental health professional suspects a person of potentially being a danger to themselves or others, they are supposed to report it to Police, who will check for firearm purchases and remove them. This is how it's supposed to work, but when someone doesn't do their job, the gun gets the bad rap.

So you wouldn't call shootings like these a regular occurrence?

July 2012 - 12 dead - 58 wounded

April 2012 - 7 dead - 3 wounded

October 2011 - 8 dead - 1 wounded

September 2011 4 dead - several wounded

January 2011 - 6 dead - 14 wounded

April 2009 - 13 dead

March 2009 - 11 dead

December 2008 - 9 dead

December 2007 - 8 dead - 5 wounded

April 2007 - 32 people dead - many wounded

March 2005 - 5 dead

April 1999 - 13 dead - many wounded

October 1991 - 23 dead

August 1986 - 14 dead

July 1984 - 21 dead

February 1983 - 14 killed

August 1966 - 15 dead - 32 wounded

And like I said it seems like it's becoming more of an occurrence.

  • Like 1

See isn't that a problem? The guy has to willingly hand over his weapons, but say he doesn't and something like this or Aurora happens.

Also how long does the hold / deemed mentally ill hold last? I ask because my old roommate tried to commit suicide (with a knife), and he has anger issues, but then 2 years later he went and got himself a handgun (legally with the background check and all). So is it just until his psychiatrist says hes clear or like is it a set time?

The government already knows about any handguns you have, at that point they probably have RS/PC to check for other firearms. Either way as I mentioned above, its a felony to possess even ammo, much less firearms at that point.

Generally a Psychiatric hold must be cleared by the courts Federally its a lifetime firearms ban, is it possible your old roommate was never put on a hold?

So you wouldn't call shootings like these a regular occurrence?

July 2012 - 12 dead - 58 wounded

April 2012 - 7 dead - 3 wounded

October 2011 - 8 dead - 1 wounded

September 2011 4 dead - several wounded

January 2011 - 6 dead - 14 wounded

April 2009 - 13 dead

March 2009 - 11 dead

December 2008 - 9 dead

December 2007 - 8 dead - 5 wounded

April 2007 - 32 people dead - many wounded

March 2005 - 5 dead

April 1999 - 13 dead - many wounded

October 1991 - 23 dead

August 1986 - 14 dead

July 1984 - 21 dead

February 1983 - 14 killed

August 1966 - 15 dead - 32 wounded

And like I said it seems like it's becoming more of an occurrence.

I'd like to see the source, and context of this list. Like I said before, mass shootings are not rare at all, but are typically not reported because it's not sensational enough to make international news. Basically, if it doesn't further the outlet's agenda, it doesn't get reported. The aurora shooting got international attention and comments from POTUS. When is the last time he was asked about MS13? When is the last time CNN or MSNBC put any stories about MS13 on air? They won't because those stories make people want MORE guns. Stories about troubled youth make people start asking questions about gun control. Even this story, a lone gunman with an axe to grind, make people question whether our gun policies are strong enough.

EDIT: Also, keep in mind 17 incidents over 50 years is not what I would consider regular.

The government already knows about any handguns you have, at that point they probably have RS/PC to check for other firearms. Either way as I mentioned above, its a felony to possess even ammo, much less firearms at that point.

Generally a Psychiatric hold must be cleared by the courts Federally its a lifetime firearms ban, is it possible your old roommate was never put on a hold?

Unlkely someone would be put on a hold for simply attempting suicide. Unless there are deeper mental issues the guy is struggling against it wouldn't make any sense to go that length.

So you wouldn't call shootings like these a regular occurrence?

March 2005 - 5 dead

April 1999 - 13 dead - many wounded

October 1991 - 23 dead

August 1986 - 14 dead

July 1984 - 21 dead

February 1983 - 14 killed

August 1966 - 15 dead - 32 wounded

Not really when there are years inbetween them.

And like I said it seems like it's becoming more of an occurrence.

July 2012 - 12 dead - 58 wounded

April 2012 - 7 dead - 3 wounded

October 2011 - 8 dead - 1 wounded

September 2011 4 dead - several wounded

January 2011 - 6 dead - 14 wounded

April 2009 - 13 dead

March 2009 - 11 dead

December 2008 - 9 dead

December 2007 - 8 dead - 5 wounded

April 2007 - 32 people dead - many wounded

Yes it does appear to be happening slightly more frequently.

Unemployment is also ridiculously high coupled with the terrible economy that is barely more than stagnation. As a country, we are not healthy and in bad times, there is indeed an increase in crime. Perhaps we should focus more on real topics that have reverberating consequences for generations to come?

The official narrative has collapsed. the lie that this was done my a lone gunman has been countered.

http://youtu.be/zYCurbSAsd4

What exactly are you saying is a lie here? Many times right after an incident takes place the media/police/what ever don't always have the correct info so what gets reported may not always be correct but saying something is a lie is saying that it's deliberate. Misinformation doesn't equate to a lie.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. They are seeking a better life too. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!