Reports of eight to 20 shot at Sikh Temple in Oak Creek

[QUOTE="0Hamburgher"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Oh please. I'm sure you haven't heard about every small group that exists worldwide. LJS9502_basic

yeah but their historicaly significant.

look at the Manson family/taliban//kkk they're a hell of allot smaller then Sikhism yet everyone knows who they are.

its not just numbers that matter.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="0Hamburgher"] Sikhism isn't that small, buddy.frannkzappa

yeah but their historicaly significant.

look at the Manson family/taliban//kkk they're a hell of allot smaller then Sikhism yet everyone knows who they are.

its not just numbers that matter.

Well maybe this time the Liberals will have there dream come true and it will be some right wing extremist who belongs to the tea party and militia . So long 2nd Amendment, Hello Martial Law

luis_07

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bare arms, shall not be infringed."

We do 'infringe' on this a lot, require licenses, ban certain 'arms' (nukes, biological/chemical weapons, RPG's, ect.)

----

And why would the US fall into martial law even if guns were banned? Is Japan under martial law?

Right....they never happen in places like Norway

UnknownSniper65

Gun-related deaths in Norway are 'much' lower (especially for homicides) in general, per 100 000 people. Even if they have 1 massacre, it doesn't nearly add up to our gun crime. Even 9/11 was "only" 10% of our yearly homicides.

Norway: .68 homicides, 0.30 gun (44%)
US------: 4.8 homicides, 4.14 gun (86%)

[QUOTE="0Hamburgher"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Oh please. I'm sure you haven't heard about every small group that exists worldwide. LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="0Hamburgher"] Sikhism isn't that small, buddy.frannkzappa

yeah but their historicaly significant.

look at the Manson family/taliban//kkk they're a hell of allot smaller then Sikhism yet everyone knows who they are.

its not just numbers that matter.

Bingo. Unfortunately western media doesn't give Sikhism much play. That leaves many of us in ignorance, as usual. It's sad that a shooting like this had to happen for a lot of people to become aware of their existence.

[QUOTE="0Hamburgher"]

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]Yes, everyone should defnitely be familiar with a religion which only .001% of the population follow.

You can't be serious.

hartsickdiscipl

I tend to agree with you. For example, there are less than 8 million Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide. Who hasn't heard of them?

Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons, for example, proselytize rampantly, so they give themselves a higher profile. Sikhs do none of those things, choosing to worship and congregate quietly, keeping a lower profile. Again, the majority are in Asia, and because they have a low profile, they don't make the mainstream US media. That's where most people get their information.

Sikhs were not in any textbooks that I had when I was in middle or high school.

[QUOTE="0Hamburgher"]

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]Yes, everyone should defnitely be familiar with a religion which only .001% of the population follow.

You can't be serious.

hartsickdiscipl

I tend to agree with you. For example, there are less than 8 million Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide. Who hasn't heard of them?

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="0Hamburgher"] If someone isn't familiar with a religion that's getting close to 30 million followers worldwide (that's a lot for a religion) then they aren't well informed

jimkabrhel

I tend to agree with you. For example, there are less than 8 million Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide. Who hasn't heard of them?

Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons, for example, proselytize rampantly, so they give themselves a higher profile. Sikhs do none of those things, choosing to worship and congregate quietly, keeping a lower profile. Again, the majority are in Asia, and because they have a low profile, they don't make the mainstream US media. That's where most people get their information.

Sikhs were not in any textbooks that I had when I was in middle or high school.

So then the issue really is their lack of active proselytizing and the fact that they are largely ignored by western media. Not that there aren't very many of them.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Actually it is. It's a small part of total population.

hartsickdiscipl

yeah but their historicaly significant.

look at the Manson family/taliban//kkk they're a hell of allot smaller then Sikhism yet everyone knows who they are.

its not just numbers that matter.

Bingo. Unfortunately western media doesn't give Sikhism much play. That leaves many of us in ignorance, as usual. It's sad that a shooting like this had to happen for a lot of people to become aware of their existence.

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Actually it is. It's a small part of total population.

LJS9502_basic

yeah but their historicaly significant.

look at the Manson family/taliban//kkk they're a hell of allot smaller then Sikhism yet everyone knows who they are.

its not just numbers that matter.

ok let me rephrase that most people in the first world. happy?

This is standard. One thread dealt with a black guy got shot in the head by a racist, and survived yet the convo turn to the gun not being strong enough. Another thread regarding african-americans supporting obama turn into a talk about term "african-americans" smh.thebest31406

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

yeah but their historicaly significant.

look at the Manson family/taliban//kkk they're a hell of allot smaller then Sikhism yet everyone knows who they are.

its not just numbers that matter.

LJS9502_basic

Bingo. Unfortunately western media doesn't give Sikhism much play. That leaves many of us in ignorance, as usual. It's sad that a shooting like this had to happen for a lot of people to become aware of their existence.

Not anymore, methinks.

Yes, everyone should defnitely be familiar with a religion which only .001% of the population follow. You can't be serious.SpartanMSU

[QUOTE="SpartanMSU"]Yes, everyone should defnitely be familiar with a religion which only .001% of the population follow. You can't be serious.Zeviander

Surprised so many haven't heard of Sikhism, it was one of the major religions we covered in school (alongside Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Hinduism i think), although the UK does have a larger population than the US. This is tragic though, horrific actions.Ravensmash

Surprised so many haven't heard of Sikhism, it was one of the major religions we covered in school (alongside Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Hinduism i think), although the UK does have a larger population than the US. This is tragic though, horrific actions.Ravensmash

thank you

[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]Surprised so many haven't heard of Sikhism, it was one of the major religions we covered in school (alongside Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Hinduism i think), although the UK does have a larger population than the US. This is tragic though, horrific actions.frannkzappa

thank you

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="Ravensmash"]Surprised so many haven't heard of Sikhism, it was one of the major religions we covered in school (alongside Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Hinduism i think), although the UK does have a larger population than the US. This is tragic though, horrific actions.LJS9502_basic

thank you

that pushes my point even more.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

thank you

frannkzappa

that pushes my point even more.

More specialized study is done in college if one elects that course.

[QUOTE="luis_07"]

Well maybe this time the Liberals will have there dream come true and it will be some right wing extremist who belongs to the tea party and militia . So long 2nd Amendment, Hello Martial Law

Inconsistancy

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bare arms, shall not be infringed."

We do 'infringe' on this a lot, require licenses, ban certain 'arms' (nukes, biological/chemical weapons, RPG's, ect.)

----

And why would the US fall into martial law even if guns were banned? Is Japan under martial law?

Right....they never happen in places like Norway

UnknownSniper65

Gun-related deaths in Norway are 'much' lower (especially for homicides) in general, per 100 000 people. Even if they have 1 massacre, it doesn't nearly add up to our gun crime. Even 9/11 was "only" 10% of our yearly homicides.

Norway: .68 homicides, 0.30 gun (44%)
US------: 4.8 homicides, 4.14 gun (86%)

But more Jews in the US than Sikhs I'd imagine...plus the whole holocaust and Israel kind of kept them in the news....LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] He's not in the US or did you not notice that?

LJS9502_basic

that pushes my point even more.

More specialized study is done in college if one elects that course.

my point was that "what Sikhism was" was taught in schools. the more people that say they were taught about Sikhism in school, the more relevant my assertion becomes.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]But more Jews in the US than Sikhs I'd imagine...plus the whole holocaust and Israel kind of kept them in the news....Zeviander

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

that pushes my point even more.

frannkzappa

More specialized study is done in college if one elects that course.

my point was that "what Sikhism was" was taught in schools. the more people that say they were taught about Sikhism in school, the more relevant my assertion becomes.

Sikhs aren't the predominant in history. LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] It actually negates it. What one country studies doesn't mean all countries study. Frankly unless one is college taking a religious elective or a specific religious school...one is not taught about religions. Public schools do not teach any religion. One would get a general over view in World Cultures of various important points in the world but it won't focus so much on religion.

More specialized study is done in college if one elects that course.

LJS9502_basic

my point was that "what Sikhism was" was taught in schools. the more people that say they were taught about Sikhism in school, the more relevant my assertion becomes.

to my knowledge the Amish aren't talked about in schools here either.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Sikhs aren't the predominant in history. Zeviander

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

my point was that "what Sikhism was" was taught in schools. the more people that say they were taught about Sikhism in school, the more relevant my assertion becomes.

frannkzappa

to my knowledge the Amish aren't talked about in schools here either.

LA Times is running a story that an anonymous federal official stated that the gunmans tattoos led to officials to consider this a domestic terrorist attack. Since there has been no official information released regarding the gunman from authorities yet, this should be taken with a grain of salt for now.

[QUOTE="Zeviander"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Sikhs aren't the predominant in history. LJS9502_basic

well they don't talk about them as religions really, more like historically significant groups.

how can you talk about or teach about India if the major religious groups which dominate the countries culture and politics historically and now, are not first discussed?

going back to my other post, the Amish aren't and never were a large part of our countries culture or politics, unlike the Sikhs were to india.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Zeviander"] If they do India in any shape or form, then Sikhism should be addressed. It is a huge part of Indian history.frannkzappa

well they don't talk about them as religions really, more like historically significant groups.

how can you talk about or teach about India if the major religious groups which dominate the countries culture and politics historically and now, are not first discussed?

[QUOTE="frannkzappa"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Public Schools don't usually delve much into religion......judging from some comments in here...it's not taught. I don't recall it being taught but I have done some independent reading though not in detail. At least I've heard of them.:PLJS9502_basic

well they don't talk about them as religions really, more like historically significant groups.

how can you talk about or teach about India if the major religious groups which dominate the countries culture and politics historically and now, are not first discussed?

point?

LA Times is running a story that an anonymous federal official stated that the gunmans tattoos led to officials to consider this a domestic terrorist attack. Since there has been no official information released regarding the gunman from authorities yet, this should be taken with a grain of salt for now.CycleOfViolence

[QUOTE="CycleOfViolence"]LA Times is running a story that an anonymous federal official stated that the gunmans tattoos led to officials to consider this a domestic terrorist attack. Since there has been no official information released regarding the gunman from authorities yet, this should be taken with a grain of salt for now.Zeviander

I'm not one to jump to conclusions but with reports of a witness mentioning earlier that the shooter was white and now the report of tattoos, the gunman in question could be a member of a white hate/neo nazi group.

[QUOTE="Zeviander"][QUOTE="CycleOfViolence"]LA Times is running a story that an anonymous federal official stated that the gunmans tattoos led to officials to consider this a domestic terrorist attack. Since there has been no official information released regarding the gunman from authorities yet, this should be taken with a grain of salt for now.CycleOfViolence

I'm not one to jump to conclusions but with reports of a witness mentioning earlier that the shooter was white and now the report of tattoos, the gunman in question could be a member of a white hate/neo nazi group.

[QUOTE="Zeviander"][QUOTE="CycleOfViolence"]LA Times is running a story that an anonymous federal official stated that the gunmans tattoos led to officials to consider this a domestic terrorist attack. Since there has been no official information released regarding the gunman from authorities yet, this should be taken with a grain of salt for now.CycleOfViolence

I'm not one to jump to conclusions but with reports of a witness mentioning earlier that the shooter was white and now the report of tattoos, the gunman in question could be a member of a white hate/neo nazi group.

Ironically, 4.8 homicides is way down from the height of the gun control movement in the United States. Your information proves the point that homicides are on the decline in the United States regardless of gun laws. All of this points to the simple fact that guns aren't the issue when it comes to the United States.

UnknownSniper65

Moar datars:
Homicides (per 100 000)

1960 5.0
1970 7.8
1980 10
1990 9.4
1991 9.7
1992 9.3
1993 9.5
1994 8.9 *Assault weapons ban*
1995 8.2
1996 7.4
1997 6.8
1998 6.2
1999 5.6
2000 5.5
2001 5.6
2002 5.6
2003 5.6
2004 5.4 *ban ends*
2005 5.6
2006 5.6
2007 5.6
2008 5.4
2009 5.0
2010 4.7
2011 4.7

I don't know the gun homicides per year so I don't know if the assault weapon ban changed much (doubt it, it was a weak "ban" that, I don't think, made it harder to get any other guns), I don't know the guns per 100 persons, households with guns for all those years. Social events for those years...

Of course lots of things affect our homicide rate, but I don't think our policy of practically 'giving away' guns is of any 'help', I'd like to see 'reasonable' gun-control, an outright ban wont work, just like addicts trying to quit cold turkey. Some way of having 'red' flags. And we have cultural issues towards killing...

[QUOTE="Zeviander"][QUOTE="CycleOfViolence"]LA Times is running a story that an anonymous federal official stated that the gunmans tattoos led to officials to consider this a domestic terrorist attack. Since there has been no official information released regarding the gunman from authorities yet, this should be taken with a grain of salt for now.CycleOfViolence

I'm not one to jump to conclusions but with reports of a witness mentioning earlier that the shooter was white and now the report of tattoos, the gunman in question could be a member of a white hate/neo nazi group.

Check my earlier post in this thread. The first eyewitness interviewed stated that there were 4 white males dressed in black tactical gear who did the shooting. He said that one was shot, leaving 3.

[QUOTE="CycleOfViolence"]

[QUOTE="Zeviander"] Wouldn't surprise me. Domestic terrorism is usually significantly more common than foreign.hartsickdiscipl

I'm not one to jump to conclusions but with reports of a witness mentioning earlier that the shooter was white and now the report of tattoos, the gunman in question could be a member of a white hate/neo nazi group.

Check my earlier post in this thread. The first eyewitness interviewed stated that there were 4 white males dressed in black tactical gear who did the shooting. He said that one was shot, leaving 3.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="CycleOfViolence"]

I'm not one to jump to conclusions but with reports of a witness mentioning earlier that the shooter was white and now the report of tattoos, the gunman in question could be a member of a white hate/neo nazi group.

LJS9502_basic

Check my earlier post in this thread. The first eyewitness interviewed stated that there were 4 white males dressed in black tactical gear who did the shooting. He said that one was shot, leaving 3.

Listen to the people who were there. And don't give me that generalized crap about eyewitnesses being unreliable. If it walks like a duck, you know the rest..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYCurbSAsd4&feature=player_embedded

another source saying the same thing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSvex9GYPlc

The accounts are concise and specific. No mistaking what these people saw.

[QUOTE="CycleOfViolence"]

[QUOTE="Zeviander"] Wouldn't surprise me. Domestic terrorism is usually significantly more common than foreign.hartsickdiscipl

I'm not one to jump to conclusions but with reports of a witness mentioning earlier that the shooter was white and now the report of tattoos, the gunman in question could be a member of a white hate/neo nazi group.

Check my earlier post in this thread. The first eyewitness interviewed stated that there were 4 white males dressed in black tactical gear who did the shooting. He said that one was shot, leaving 3.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="CycleOfViolence"]

I'm not one to jump to conclusions but with reports of a witness mentioning earlier that the shooter was white and now the report of tattoos, the gunman in question could be a member of a white hate/neo nazi group.

l4dak47

Check my earlier post in this thread. The first eyewitness interviewed stated that there were 4 white males dressed in black tactical gear who did the shooting. He said that one was shot, leaving 3.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="CycleOfViolence"]

I'm not one to jump to conclusions but with reports of a witness mentioning earlier that the shooter was white and now the report of tattoos, the gunman in question could be a member of a white hate/neo nazi group.

l4dak47

Check my earlier post in this thread. The first eyewitness interviewed stated that there were 4 white males dressed in black tactical gear who did the shooting. He said that one was shot, leaving 3.

I'm not making it anything. It is what it is. 2 of the first witnesses interviewed are saying that there were multiple shooters involved in a well-coordinated attack. At least 1 of them says there were 4 people in tactical gear doing the shooting. I didn't say it. He did.

[QUOTE="l4dak47"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Check my earlier post in this thread. The first eyewitness interviewed stated that there were 4 white males dressed in black tactical gear who did the shooting. He said that one was shot, leaving 3.

hartsickdiscipl

I'm not making it anything. It is what it is. 2 of the first witnesses interviewed are saying that there were multiple shooters involved in a well-coordinated attack. At least 1 of them says there were 4 people in tactical gear doing the shooting. I didn't say it. He did.

CNN is reporting now that the shooter was a white male, around 40, and wore a white shirt with no bulletproof vest.

*post*Inconsistancy