http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11817490/France-train-attack-US-soldiers-foil-massacre-live.html
These guys have my respect. What a bloodbath that would have been had they not been there.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
"Hero off-duty soldiers and British IT worker" sounds like a bad TV show XD
Seriously though, well done =D
Also, hey Eli! =P
Glad to hear it. Usually when a catastrophe is stopped, they tend to keep it out of the news, to protect the heroes and let you sleep better at night. Opposite when things go wrong, it's why there's so much bad stuff in the news.
It was actually a soldier, an airman, and a civilian that was a friend of theirs visiting Europe. But hats off to them for stopping a bad situation from becoming worse. If I'm not mistaken, a British civilian helped them as well.
Represent.
I heard the French guard locked himself in his room, what a polar opposite. And yeah, more gun control Frenchy.
If someone boarded a train in the U.S. with such a weapon, half the population would claim he was just "representin' his seckind 'mendment riiiiiggghtts.", making everyone on the train "safer"...
I heard the French guard locked himself in his room, what a polar opposite. And yeah, more gun control Frenchy.
"representin' his seckind 'mendment riiiiiggghtts."
I'm having a really hard time figuring out what vernacular you are going for here.
@samusbeliskner:
What's up with people keep talking about USA with me when I said nothing about USA??? Is GS quote system having glitch or something?
You might figure it out, sooner or later. :)
@samusbeliskner:
What's up with people keep talking about USA with me when I said nothing about USA??? Is GS quote system having glitch or something?
Because bullshit aside, "best defense is a good offense" works, whether you are arguing online or faced with a gun towing madman.
Good stuff. The terrorist deserved a dose of democracy. Does France have capital punishment? The bastard should be purged from existence.
Good job. Everyone with a gun in public is a threat. I am glad this guy was stopped.
There you go again, painting with the broad brush. Are legal licensed carriers threats and need to be stopped? Are cops and soldiers?
Any one of those individuals are magnitudes more dangerous with a loaded weapon than they are without, and any of of them could simply decide to start firing at any moment, so every single one of them is a threat. Then again, anyone can be a threat, but an individual with a very dangerous and very deafly weapon is much, much more of a threat than anyone else.
As for whether they "need" to be "stopped", I assume you mean disarmed, because I get the impression you're one of those irrationally paranoid people who see "gubment" and "gun grabbers" coming for your guns around every corner. My answer to that would lean toward yes, as removing potential threats to society will inevitably make society safer, but we also have the rights of the individual as well as the benefit to society that some members carrying provide to society, as there are undoubtedly extremely infrequent circumstances where a trained, responsible individual with a gun does make things safer for society. One needs to weight the two to make a decision, and when I do, I lean toward removing all weapons from the hands of citizens in public, with licenses required to transport them from one location to another. If you are so irrationally paranoid of the world around you that you unreasonably feel that the only way you can be "safe" outside is to have a loaded gun strapped to your hip, you have mental issues and need to keep yourself and your guns at home, where they belong. As for police, we can arm the ones who work in the most dangerous situations, but much more money needs to be spent on continual training and psych evaluations for them.
Good stuff. The terrorist deserved a dose of democracy. Does France have capital punishment? The bastard should be purged from existence.
No, they are a civilized country :>
false,France used to be brutal,there once was a capital punishment there,and the only thing that's close to define it was a guillotine,it has chopped many heads since the French Revolution,and the last head was chopped on 10 September 1977 in Marseille.
@samusbeliskner:
Good job. Everyone with a gun in public is a threat. I am glad this guy was stopped.
There you go again, painting with the broad brush. Are legal licensed carriers threats and need to be stopped? Are cops and soldiers?
Any one of those individuals are magnitudes more dangerous with a loaded weapon than they are without, and any of of them could simply decide to start firing at any moment, so every single one of them is a threat. Then again, anyone can be a threat, but an individual with a very dangerous and very deafly weapon is much, much more of a threat than anyone else.
As for whether they "need" to be "stopped", I assume you mean disarmed, because I get the impression you're one of those irrationally paranoid people who see "gubment" and "gun grabbers" coming for your guns around every corner. My answer to that would lean toward yes, as removing potential threats to society will inevitably make society safer, but we also have the rights of the individual as well as the benefit to society that some members carrying provide to society, as there are undoubtedly extremely infrequent circumstances where a trained, responsible individual with a gun does make things safer for society. One needs to weight the two to make a decision, and when I do, I lean toward removing all weapons from the hands of citizens in public, with licenses required to transport them from one location to another. If you are so irrationally paranoid of the world around you that you unreasonably feel that the only way you can be "safe" outside is to have a loaded gun strapped to your hip, you have mental issues and need to keep yourself and your guns at home, where they belong. As for police, we can arm the ones who work in the most dangerous situations, but much more money needs to be spent on continual training and psych evaluations for them.
Seriously dude, again you are delusional, and you would be better suited in a communist country. You call for the disarming of the entire public, just becase YOU personally don't like guns or feel safe around them, well boo fucking hoo, get the **** over it. You even call for disarming the police, which is fucking ludacrious. So what, the only people left with guns will be the criminals, while the public and police officers are left unarmed? Great fucking plan. Go move to communist China if you don't like how our country operates, they will be glad to take some sheep who will conform to their authority without question.
@jd588: looks like some quote function got f*cked up at a wrong time,do I look like a delusional creep?sorry,I'm an Independent. I assume that you're telling me I am right in believing the existence of French brutality long ago
@jd588: it's ok,shit happens,I don't know whether it's the site's response time being slow today or sensitive double-click
@samusbeliskner:
Good job. Everyone with a gun in public is a threat. I am glad this guy was stopped.
There you go again, painting with the broad brush. Are legal licensed carriers threats and need to be stopped? Are cops and soldiers?
Any one of those individuals are magnitudes more dangerous with a loaded weapon than they are without, and any of of them could simply decide to start firing at any moment, so every single one of them is a threat. Then again, anyone can be a threat, but an individual with a very dangerous and very deafly weapon is much, much more of a threat than anyone else.
As for whether they "need" to be "stopped", I assume you mean disarmed, because I get the impression you're one of those irrationally paranoid people who see "gubment" and "gun grabbers" coming for your guns around every corner. My answer to that would lean toward yes, as removing potential threats to society will inevitably make society safer, but we also have the rights of the individual as well as the benefit to society that some members carrying provide to society, as there are undoubtedly extremely infrequent circumstances where a trained, responsible individual with a gun does make things safer for society. One needs to weight the two to make a decision, and when I do, I lean toward removing all weapons from the hands of citizens in public, with licenses required to transport them from one location to another. If you are so irrationally paranoid of the world around you that you unreasonably feel that the only way you can be "safe" outside is to have a loaded gun strapped to your hip, you have mental issues and need to keep yourself and your guns at home, where they belong. As for police, we can arm the ones who work in the most dangerous situations, but much more money needs to be spent on continual training and psych evaluations for them.
Seriously dude, again you are delusional, and you would be better suited in a communist country. You call for the disarming of the entire public, just becase YOU personally don't like guns or feel safe around them, well boo fucking hoo, get the **** over it. You even call for disarming the police, which is fucking ludacrious. So what, the only people left with guns will be the criminals, while the public and police officers are left unarmed? Great fucking plan. Go move to communist China if you don't like how our country operates, they will be glad to take some sheep who will conform to their authority without question.
Another straw man. I called for banning most guns in public. I don't care if you have 50 guns at home. Did you ever stop to ask yourself why logical fallacy is your only recourse discussions like this?
@samusbeliskner: "If someone boarded a train in the U.S. with such a weapon, half the population would claim he was just "representin' his seckind 'mendment riiiiiggghtts.", making everyone on the train "safer"..."
So Its only cool when white Americans do it?
Good stuff. The terrorist deserved a dose of democracy. Does France have capital punishment? The bastard should be purged from existence.
No, they are a civilized country :>
Too bad. They really should make an exception for terrorists.
@samusbeliskner: "If someone boarded a train in the U.S. with such a weapon, half the population would claim he was just "representin' his seckind 'mendment riiiiiggghtts.", making everyone on the train "safer"..."
So Its only cool when white Americans do it?
Cool. Putting a gun in your hands is one of the most idiotic things a person can do. What do you mean, cool?
And the authorities got him alive too, which is pretty great IMO. Now, the bastard can be questioned.
French intelligence agencies are upset because those bungling fools interfered with their latest false flag operation.
How will France justify its next episode of imperialistic intervention in North Africa now?
:-/
France is going to annex Crimea?
French intelligence agencies are upset because those bungling fools interfered with their latest false flag operation.
How will France justify its next episode of imperialistic intervention in North Africa now?
:-/
France is going to annex Crimea?
Russia's annexation of Crimea wasn't imperialism. Crimea seceded willingly from Ukraine, then Russia merely accepted the territory back into its warm embrace.
France, meanwhile, has been implicated in all sorts of ugly assassinations and regime change operations in an effort to reassert its colonial interests.
Good stuff. The terrorist deserved a dose of democracy. Does France have capital punishment? The bastard should be purged from existence.
No, they are a civilized country :>
false,France used to be brutal,there once was a capital punishment there,and the only thing that's close to define it was a guillotine,it has chopped many heads since the French Revolution,and the last head was chopped on 10 September 1977 in Marseille.
The person you quoted meant present day, clearly. So TRUE.
@-God-: in the past yes,they're brutal,but not anymore since the mid 80's,in its place it's just imprisonment,nothing else..see how people's morality changed after seeing and knowing such brutality the past people did long time ago.
French intelligence agencies are upset because those bungling fools interfered with their latest false flag operation.
How will France justify its next episode of imperialistic intervention in North Africa now?
:-/
France is going to annex Crimea?
Russia's annexation of Crimea wasn't imperialism. Crimea seceded willingly from Ukraine, then Russia merely accepted the territory back into its warm embrace.
France, meanwhile, has been implicated in all sorts of ugly assassinations and regime change operations in an effort to reassert its colonial interests.
You're always good for a laugh or two.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/victim-in-metro-slaying-stabbed-repeatedly-during-robbery-on-train/2015/07/07/8dd09132-249b-11e5-b72c-2b7d516e1e0e_story.html
Contrast with that story a few weeks ago. Remember, it's up to you to stop evil. Don't expect someone else to do it.
One of them was an Armenian...
Awesome.
Also and to be fair, a french man was the initial attacker and then was aided by everyone.
Awesome.
Also and to be fair, a american man was the initial attacker and then was aided by everyone.
Or I guess we could just call him an French American, but lets be fair.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment