Bomb rocks government offices in Oslo, two said dead

[Blue]

America is unique in this instance. The idea does not work outside America.

Too bad isn't it? Mourn the dead, bury them, wait for the next ones, OR, morn the dead, arm up(because that is what the enemy is doing) fight back and perhaps live. If not, surely perish.

Tell me, when has a brave citizen taken out nutjobs that go on shooting sprees.

There is not enough room on this forum to tell. Want the most recent? The nutjob that shot up Sen. Giffords rally and her. The guy that tackled the nutjob was a CC holder and armed(and not a dem btw) and he used his best judgment not to draw and shoot and effected the arrest without further incident without deadly force. The guy did the textbook takedown and was only a regular citizen. Exemplary action IMO.

IIANM you work in law enforcement, the moment something like this happens you want to clear the area of civilians and allow the pro's to do the job. You don't want vigilantes getting into the fray.

I no longer work as an LEO for the last 20 years. I do have about 9 years active duty experience however, and the answer to your question is no. If I am aiming at the same guy that the civi next to me is in that scenario, I am most likely in good company. Military situations in war are different though. Not civilian encounters in the US.

What you are saying applies more to 1:1 type of scenarios rather than 1:many.

No

If citizens are armed, then chances of petty crime will come down. A burgular thinks twice before breaking into your house with you inside if he knows you're armed.

If citizens are armed...ALL crime goes down.

It makes no difference if he wants to take shots in a crowded place. In that scenario your advantages are minimal at best compared to countries that do not have gun laws. Whose main aim is to prevent against repressive govt. In cities with strict conceal-carry laws your odds are no better.

Unless your the one with the CCL. I am never unarmed, be it a firearm, knife, blunt force weapon(hammer, tool, furniture, rock). I am a self defense expert that will utilize anything I can put my hand on to enhance my ability to defend myself or others. Do a search on a thread we had a couple of years ago where that nutto decapited the guy on a Canadian bus if you want inside my mind. I had many colorful exchanges there about self-defense and self-sacrifice. It summed up my position well. NEVER be a victim. Never put yourself in position to be a victim.

I see it just as a spontaneous show of hands to make a statement. The real battle remains to be seen in the months ahead. What changes happen as a result of this action.

I agree. I also predict nothing will change there, though I hope the opposite.

[Bigfella]

"Jews in the UK who choose to do so have been using Rabbinic courts for some civil matters for a very long time (perhaps centuries) as the do in the US & many other places. Is this the 'creeping judaization' of society?"

Only among the Jews of that society. Of course you know this and can draw the distinction between Snapper's fears and your analogy. Her concern has legitimacy not dismissed by your retort. Please correct me if wrong but in no way, shape nor form does Rabbinic law hold sway over the American or British civil/criminal justice system. Jews voluntarily submit to these rulings. They hold no force of law and are equivalent to mutually-agreed mediation.

I don't want to test Tarek's patience, but I do need to reply to this. Hopefully this will suffice as a reply to snapper too.

First, my main objection was to the nature of the language. Phrases like 'creeping Islamization' are precisely the sort of language I objected to upthread. it is a phrase pregnant with threat & designed to evoke fear of a total takeover. I don't assume Snapper meant that, but I see it that way. There are ways for intelligent folk like ourselves to discuss such matters without resorting to misleading & fearmongering language. Snapper may indeed have geinue concerns, but they are not advanced by aligning wiht such language.

I used the example of jews in part because we seem to more clearly see the intolerance in language when the target is Jews rather than muslims - our collective history at play I imagine. The other reason I used it was because in the British example my understanding is that Sharia courts derive their power from the same legal source as Rabbinic ones - the right to seek mediation of one's choice. My understanding is that legally speaking rulings in UK sharia courts only carry the force of law if both parties assent. In the case of both systems it is cetainly possible to pressure members of the community to seek such mediation when they do not wish to. This is effectively the price one pays for being a member of a closely knit community or following a faith in a particular manner. Catholics of my grandparents generation would recognise the problem clearly enough. Amish in America would too.

This whole issue sits at an awkward intersection in our legal & social systems - to what extent do do we prevent people from following their beliefs because we might disagree with them? The question is not do we (we do) but how & where do we draw the line. Wherever that might be (and as an avowed secularist I heartily dislike religious law supplanting other laws), my argument is that it must be equitable. Single out muslims & you create one problem to solve another.

[Bigfella]

In America, an armed or simply brave citizen usually takes down nutjobs before they get to mow down that many people. The money they spent on roses could have bought a lot of guns or self-defense classes. Not to take anything away from rembrance and compassion, but how you respond to threats decides whether you get attacked again. I think they should get angry. Just MHO.

Sniper,

I don't want this thread to become yet another 'pro vs anti' guns thread, it simply isn't appropriate. I also don't want my comments to be seen as furthering that argument. I don't want people to rush in with the usual list of reasons as to why US homicide rates are different. That isn't what this is about. What I am trying to do here is help to provide a context as to why Norwegians might view this event differntly to Americans.

Others have already pointed out that he chose a target that wouldn't be guarded - a confined space where escape was difficult. he also created a situation where he would have as much time as possible to act unimpeded. I imagine he would have been stopped sooner in the US, but how much sooner? There is just no way to know. We don't know that there would have ben someone wiht a gun & that they would have lived long enough to act. I suspect that US law enforcement is better equipped to deal with this sort of thing - but that is out of a necessity that I doubt Norwegians would want to replicate.

Norway has a VERY low homicide rate. In a bad year it is a bit above 1 per 100,000, in a good year close to 0.5. This compares to America, where about the lowest ever recorded is about a 4, the highest over 6 & the current fluctuates bewteen 5 & 5.5. Even the safest US states have double the homicide rate of Norway. Now, here is the slap in the face. Even with this mass killing - the worst such event in Norway outside wartime - Norway's homicide rate will be lower this year than any year in US history.

As I said to someone on another forum, I suspect Norwegians will choose their idea of a safe society over America's. You may not agree, but I imagine Norwegians will see their reasons for sticking to their ways as being just important as you see yours.

[S2]

Bigfella Reply

You've my reply elsewhere.:)

[Tarek Morgen]

What the hell? I told you not to use this tragedy to score some political points. I don't give a damn if your targets are left, white, christian, muslims or fecking smurfs. You do NOT get to fire some cheap shots over the cold bloody corpses of dozens kids and teenager. If you are not able to make your points without abusing such a tragedy, you might want to consider if they are really worth to be made at all.

This topic is closed for now, while not everyone here took part in it, it were more than I wish it to be, all of whom should have known better.

Seriously guys..wtf