PDA

View Full Version : Wisconsin Shooting: 7 People Killed At Sikh Temple, Including Shooter


Sohel
August 6, 2012, 05:55 AM
OAK CREEK, Wis., Aug 5 (Reuters) - A gunman killed six people and critically wounded three at a Sikh temple during Sunday services before police shot him dead in an attack that authorities are treating as an act of domestic terrorism.

Witnesses said the gunman opened fire when he entered the kitchen at the Sikh Temple of Wisconsin in suburban Milwaukee at about 10:30 a.m. CDT (1530 GMT) as women prepared a Sunday meal, sending worshippers fleeing to escape the barrage.

The suspect was a bald, white man, approximately 40 years old, said Thomas Ahern, a spokesman for the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Authorities did not release his identity.

Four people were shot dead inside the sprawling temple. Three, including the gunman, were killed outside.
...

Turban-wearing Sikhs are often mistaken for Muslims, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation is overseeing the probe into shootings, Edwards said.

READ MORE (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/05/wisconsin-shooting-sikh-temple_n_1744256.html)

There is NO alternative to diversity education.

Zunaid
August 6, 2012, 05:59 AM
Does it matter if it were a mistaken identity? As a friend said:

In the aftermath of the Wisconsin shootings, surrealism reigned on the U.S. news channels. Anchors were educating the average American about Sikhism and Islam and patiently explaining the differences. But should the distinction matter? I can be any faith, wear a turban or not, wear a hijab or not, wear a kara or not, but I shouldn’t be killed for wearing my religion on my sleeve. You can’t call it a mistake because a crime against Muslims would be just as heinous.

F6_Turbo
August 6, 2012, 06:06 AM
yup talk about missing the point....

It would have been acceptable/understandable if the gunman had shot and killed 7 muslims......

If that was that his target at all....after all he might have simply wanted to kill some brown people(been an anti-immigration wackjob)

AsifTheManRahman
August 6, 2012, 10:04 AM
Anchors were educating the average American about Sikhism and Islam and patiently explaining the differences.If you're planning on killing Muslims, here's how you make sure they aren't Sikhs first.

http://vibrantlivingmagazine.com/Vibrant-Living-Magazine-May-June-2011/freddie-mercury-facepalm-meme-i6.jpg

zinatf
August 6, 2012, 10:25 AM
Very sad. RIP to the Sikhs who have lost their lives.

NoName
August 6, 2012, 10:38 AM
I swear they tried to explain the differences after the 9/11 backlash where Sikhs were targeted mistakenly, guess that didn't work.

Btw the gunman was an ex-soldier who was discharged after being demoted, you'd think he'd know the differences if he was targeting Muslims. Unless if he's a red-neck, methinks he had vendetta against Sikhs.

roman
August 6, 2012, 10:57 AM
My condolences to all that are affected. When will the violence and hatred stop?

al Furqaan
August 6, 2012, 08:09 PM
yup talk about missing the point....

It would have been acceptable/understandable if the gunman had shot and killed 7 muslims......

If that was that his target at all....after all he might have simply wanted to kill some brown people(been an anti-immigration wackjob)

That is pretty 4th Reich-ish...but another major issue is gun control. There is seriously something wrong with America and its cowboy fetish with guns. Diversity training or lack thereof isn't an issue either, IMO. The problem is easy access to guns. There are too many mass shootings to ignore the issue. People's lives shouldn't be at risk just so a bunch of emotionally insecure people can have the right to pack heat.

Zunaid
August 6, 2012, 08:15 PM
What the NRA and other Rep apologist try to ignore is a critical phrase in the second amendment.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Note the bolding.

al Furqaan
August 6, 2012, 09:19 PM
What the NRA and other Rep apologist try to ignore is a critical phrase in the second amendment.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Note the bolding.

How is "the right of the people" defined? Does that include you and me, or only those who are members of recognized para-military groups? Even if it includes the former, the times have changed...people don't need to be armed when you don't have the threat of Indian attacks, wild animals, and in the presence of 911 emergency and a well equipped police force.

Antora
August 6, 2012, 09:41 PM
Very sad :(
RIP to those who lost their lives. :(

Jadukor
August 6, 2012, 10:45 PM
"Guns don't kill People, People kill People" that phrase is a pile of horse poop in my opinion.. If someone wanted to kill other people with his/her bare fists how many would he be able to kill? It's the Guns that enable scrawny young teenagers to play Rambo

Zunaid
August 6, 2012, 10:49 PM
Perhaps if bannec bullets. That doesn't come afoul of the 2nd amendment. Sure carry a bazooka - but no bullets or shells.

Sohel
August 6, 2012, 10:53 PM
Needless to say, California style "diversity education" isn't designed to recognize various ethnics groups correctly so that the Fascist element can kill the "right" people. It is there to combat precisely the type of ignorance, hatred and cowboy culture that contribute to such evil violence.

Sohel
August 6, 2012, 10:56 PM
How is "the right of the people" defined? Does that include you and me, or only those who are members of recognized para-military groups? Even if it includes the former, the times have changed...people don't need to be armed when you don't have the threat of Indian attacks, wild animals, and in the presence of 911 emergency and a well equipped police force.

TJ meant a regulated militia comprised of free and enlightened citizens, regulated by duly elected community representatives fully accountable to their constituency.

His stance, in light of the egregious violence plaguing our society centuries after the revolutionary times of the late 1700s, would've been different in form IMO, and in all likelihood, involve a sweeping ban on assault weapons owned by private citizens not in a duly regulated and recognized militia.

-As a Jeffersonian Democrat.

al Furqaan
August 9, 2012, 01:21 AM
His stance, in light of the egregious violence plaguing our society centuries after the revolutionary times of the late 1700s, would've been different in form IMO, and in all likelihood, involve a sweeping ban of assault weapons by private citizens not in a duly regulated and recognized militia.

-As a Jeffersonian Democrat.

Still leaves wiggle room. Too much for my liking. Whats to prevent the World Church of Creator (or whatever they call themselves these days) from petitioning the Michelle Bachmann's of their precinct that they are a "legitimate" militia and then getting the guns that way? How can we say "no" to them before they've committed any crimes, knowing full well that saying "yes" is like giving a 5 year old a water balloon?

I say do away with guns altogether! And no I'm not a liberal, or a socialist, or a communist, nor do I hate guns! But there's something profoundly disgusting about innocent people getting killed so a bunch of cowboys can prance around with the right to carry oozies to stoke their own egos.

Banglatiger84
August 9, 2012, 03:17 AM
"Guns don't kill People, People kill People" that phrase is a pile of horse poop in my opinion.. If someone wanted to kill other people with his/her bare fists how many would he be able to kill? It's the Guns that enable scrawny young teenagers to play Rambo

One of the more stupid things i have heard in that line of thinking is "if guns were controlled, the Colorado shooter would have used a knife to stab all the movie goers"........

Its one thing to be able to purchase revolvers, but such high powered assault weapons ?

akabir77
August 9, 2012, 10:12 AM
BTW that same week they burned down a Masque in Joplin MO. and if you read the comments in the yahoo after the news you will think Muslims are the new jews... Some guy is saying Hitler was wrong killing jews he should have killed all muslims...


http://news.yahoo.com/joplin-mosque-razed-fire-2nd-blaze-summer-160342127.html?_esi=1

Kabir
August 10, 2012, 12:16 AM
BTW that same week they burned down a Masque in Joplin MO. and if you read the comments in the yahoo after the news you will think Muslims are the new jews... Some guy is saying Hitler was wrong killing jews he should have killed all muslims...

I actually go to some of the Canadian news sites just to read the comments. The more it relates to Islam and Muslims, the more radical the comments become full of hate speech and what not. It's a notable few...once you follow these news more frequently and read these comments you'll see that these are the same people...

Zunaid
August 10, 2012, 12:19 AM
I actually go to some of the Canadian news sites just to read the comments. The more it relates to Islam and Muslims, the more radical the comments become full of hate speech and what not. It's a notable few...once you follow these news more frequently and read these comments you'll see that these are the same people...

I agree with Kabir. It's the same set of trolls you'll find commenting on most posts. For most parts, these trolls are of the extreme right-wing lunatic fringe. My advice - don't read them. Don't waste your time.

Kabir
August 10, 2012, 12:34 AM
I agree with Kabir. It's the same set of trolls you'll find commenting on most posts. For most parts, these trolls are of the extreme right-wing lunatic fringe. My advice - don't read them. Don't waste your time.

I disagree. I say we should all read them...and use this to learn how to grow a thick skin for comments from idiots.

Sohel
August 10, 2012, 12:49 AM
Still leaves wiggle room. Too much for my liking. Whats to prevent the World Church of Creator (or whatever they call themselves these days) from petitioning the Michelle Bachmann's of their precinct that they are a "legitimate" militia and then getting the guns that way? How can we say "no" to them before they've committed any crimes, knowing full well that saying "yes" is like giving a 5 year old a water balloon?

I say do away with guns altogether! And no I'm not a liberal, or a socialist, or a communist, nor do I hate guns! But there's something profoundly disgusting about innocent people getting killed so a bunch of cowboys can prance around with the right to carry oozies to stoke their own egos.

That's not the way the "legitimization" of things work in the US bro. Any serious legislation pertaining to the legitimacy of a militia would involve the Supreme Court assessing the constitutionality of the legislation in light of not only the letter and spirit of the constitution which protects the rights of the dissenting minority against popular will, but also in light of public safety interest within our national context.

There would also be widespread involvement of the DHS, FBI, ATF and State as well as local Police from an enforcement standpoint.

I don't see any wiggle room at all, even without getting into just whom TJ could consider to be the enlightened, freedom loving and responsible citizen of this day and age.

A comprehensive ban on assault weapons, both fully assembled and broken down into components, won't get rid of the black market where they'd still be available, but would allow the authorities to focus on a significantly more narrow area to scan, search for and assess threat. That and diversity education , coupled with constitutionally sound but aggressive preemption, would go a long way in preventing domestic terrorism. There is no need to reverse any amendment and be bogged down in a greater quagmire against the NRA than we're in already.