5 dead, 8 injured in Fort Lauderdale airport shooting

Nothing to see here, just another day in the land of the free.

When will America learn?

I hope they get the guy and those wounded get the medical attention they need. Politics is the very reason people still have access to guns capable of killing "many people" in just a few short seconds. Sadly, too many people are more motivated by their political obsessions than common decency.

We've got many more issues to worry about than guns now. Interesting how such a vital issue gets put on the back burner (when was the last time you heard a major politician talking about this issue?).

"Guns again?" Hmmm, don't see anyone blaming the perpetrator. Should I be surprised, Nope!

Righty O Bass, now that you're here could you explain why people in America need to carry both guns and ammo on airplanes? All it takes is a quick trip to the toilet after baggage retrieval to be a lethal threat in a packed public transit zone. Not made possible by a flawed law?

Nothing to see here, just another day in the land of the free. When will America learn?

What if they have learned and have decided that this is an acceptable cost?

"Guns again?" Hmmm, don't see anyone blaming the perpetrator. Should I be surprised, Nope!

How could they say 'this perpetrator again'? The perpetrator changes from incident to incident. Guns however remain consistent through each of these shootings.

What if they have learned and have decided that this is an acceptable cost?

I think that is the case. Americans are ok with people getting killed, as long as they can continue to be the ones who also have the opportunity to kill.

I think that is the case. Americans are ok with people getting killed, as long as they can continue to be the ones who also have the opportunity to kill.

Which of course then begs the question: Do you blame them? You have what 32-50% of a adults own a firearm and as a result 1 hundredth of one percent of the population dies because of it each year and you have two hundredths of one percent that are wounded because of it.

Which of course then begs the question: Do you blame them?

Of course. Their selfishness results in incidents like this.

The easy answer in this case is that he clearly shouldn't have been allowed to fly.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/latest-multiple-dead-wounded-airport-shooting-44604216

A law enforcement official says the Florida airport gunman told the FBI in November that the government was controlling his mind and was forcing him to watch Islamic State group videos.

The official was not authorized to discuss an ongoing investigation by name and spoke Friday on condition of anonymity.

The official says agents in Anchorage completed their interview with 26-year-old Esteban Santiago and called the police, who took him for a mental health evaluation.

Life and liberty are rights enshrined in America's founding documents. So unless that wording gets deleted, laws should strive to protect as many people as possible, not just a narrow class of nutters who need to pack guns every time they fly. This shooter, Iraq war vet Esteban Santiago, acted strangely in past encounters with LEO such as when he rambled about being forced to watch ISIS videos online. In theory, a prime specimen of who should not be allowed a gun through TSA screening. Why enable mass murder, the antithesis of the announced ideals of life and liberty?

How could they say 'this perpetrator again'? The perpetrator changes from incident to incident. Guns however remain consistent through each of these shootings.

Oh, really? So what should be done in your opinion?

I think that is the case. Americans are ok with people getting killed, as long as they can continue to be the ones who also have the opportunity to kill.

Wow, Strange, just wow, man! Well, for the record, I just refuse to believe the lefts stance on the guns argument is not the underlying issue.

but every time you get a bunch of people like at baggage claim or like outside of TSA (Transportation Security Administration) where you’re going to security or lines at the ticket counter, it’s a soft target,” the senator told CNN.

So our security theater, rather than making travelers safer, actually makes them a soft target?

“Thoughts and prayers for all. Stay safe!” he tweeted.

Ah good, Tweeter-elect-in-Chief is offering his "thoughts and prayers". Because as we all know, thoughts and prayers have been conclusively been shown to be the best way to stop a killer with a gun.

NolivingJAN. 07, 2017 - 09:58AM JST Which of course then begs the question: Do you blame them? You have what 32-50% of a adults own a firearm and as a result 1 hundredth of one percent of the population dies because of it each year and you have two hundredths of one percent that are wounded because of it.

Erm, yeah, I do blame them. Because the thing these gun fanatics don't understand is that by blocking even reasonable gun regulation, they ensure innocent people are going to die by these guns. Their paranoia is fueling the deaths of people who don't deserve to die.

Oh, really? So what should be done in your opinion?

The constitution should be amended, guns should be made illegal, and those who refuse to turn them in should be arrested.

It would be a hell of a disruption, but Trump could do it! He can do anything!

The constitution should be amended, guns should be made illegal, and those who refuse to turn them in should be arrested.

Australia tried mandatory gun confiscation and got what, twenty or thirty percent ? I'd say 10 at most in the US, entirely from peaceful, law abiding citizens but you would see an epidemic of law enforcement officials killed in the process.

Australia tried mandatory gun confiscation and got what, twenty or thirty percent ?

Gun control in Australia has been a success. Just ask Australians. And by the way - making up numbers is never a replacement for finding real ones.

I'd say 10 at most in the US, entirely from peaceful, law abiding citizens

So you think that only 10% of gun owners in the US are peaceful and law abiding? Got it.

Erm, yeah, I do blame them. Because the thing these gun fanatics don't understand is that by blocking even reasonable gun regulation, they ensure innocent people are going to die by these guns. Their paranoia is fueling the deaths of people who don't deserve to die.

If the only acceptable cost to be able to enjoy or own any product is zero deaths then we are all going to live very boring lives. So it can't be zero, you have to accept that people, whether they be innocent or not are going to have to die so that you can enjoy life.

At this point the issue is one of diminishing returns, you are already having 32-50% of the population owns the product and it results in three hundredths of one percent of the population being killed or wounded. Any additional laws are really going to impact a wide swath of the population while at the same time have a very minimal impact on reducing the mortality rate(Thousands of one percent annually).

You show me the evidence supporting that statement, coupled with a cited statistical breakdown of how many alcohol deaths involve someone other than the person who drank compared to how often gun deaths involve someone other than a violent attacker, and then you'll have a point worth going forward on.

If the goal here is a sincere effort to save lives then it is irrelevant if the death is a homicide, suicide, accident, victim is innocent or guilty, etc. because a premature death is a premature death regardless of cause.

Here is the information you requested:

According to the Department of Justice of the USA nearly 40% of all violent crimes in the USA, non fatal assaults, rapes, homicides, etc. Alcohol plays a primary contributing factor:

"Alcohol is a factor in 40% of all violent crimes today, and according to the Department of Justice, 37% of almost 2 million convicted offenders currently in jail, report that they were drinking at the time of their arrest."

Additional information:

"About 3 million violent crimes occur each year in which victims perceive the offender to have been drinking and statistics related to alcohol use by violent offenders generally show that about half of all homicides and assaults are committed when the offender, victim, or both have been drinking. Among violent crimes, with the exception of robberies, the offender is far more likely to have been drinking than under the influence of other drugs."

Here is more information: "Alcohol is often a factor in violence where the attacker and the victim know each other. Two-thirds of victims who were attacked by an intimate (including a current or former spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend) reported that alcohol had been involved. Nearly 500,000 incidents between intimates involve offenders who have been drinking;"

And more:

"Each year, more than 600,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 are assaulted by another student who has been drinking. 95% of all violent crime on college campuses involves the use of alcohol by the assailant, victim or both. 90% of acquaintance rape and sexual assault on college campuses involves the use of alcohol by the assailant, victim or both."

https://www.ncadd.org/about-addiction/alcohol-drugs-and-crime

Further more Alcohol is responsible for 88,000 deaths annually in the USA, that is more than twice the number of gun deaths in the USA.

https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm

Now onto firearms:

Gun deaths: In 2010, guns took the lives of 31,076 Americans in homicides(~11-12k), suicides(~18-20) and unintentional shootings(~500-1,000).

Gun woundings: 73,505 Americans were treated in hospital emergency departments for non-fatal gunshot wounds in 2010

http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-deaths-and-injuries-statistics/

Australia tried mandatory gun confiscation and got what, twenty or thirty percent ?

Gun control in Australia has been a success. Just ask Australians.

Gun control has been a great success in Australia going from a gun massacre every 1.5 years before the controls were brought in, to none in the last 20 years. This does not mean that there isn't any gun crime, but the level of safety (both real and perceived) is very high here. Now, on saying that, Australia doesn't have (and never really has ever had) a gun culture the way the U.S. has. I think some of the arguments that have been put forward about acceptable risk are valid arguments, and it's up to the nation as a whole to make that decision. In Australia, we didn't really change much with our gun control laws as far as culture is concern - completely different story for the U.S.

As for this incident. It would be nice to see just as much passion in the argument about how we treat people with mental illness. From what I've read, this guy was an Iraq vet who got pretty messed up by his time over there. I'd love to find out what was (or wasn't) done for him on his return. In this case, I'd even suggest that this might be more important than the gun discussion.

Readers, please stay on topic. Comparisons with other countries are not relevant to this discussion.

This is a strawman fallacy. I did not call for zero deaths, I said that America's approach to gun ownership is unacceptable because the people who are victims of gun violence are not necessarily the people who accept gun ownership as a backbone of society.

So in other words as long as all the people who are dying from firearms are those who accept gun ownership then you are OK with it? In other words as long as not a single person who does not accept guns is killed you are OK with this?

That is an impossible standard to meet, not just for guns but for cars, alcohol, sex, board games, etc.

I never said my goal was simply to save lives, so that's another strawman fallacy.

So in other words your goal is to get rid of something you don't approve of? If so that is hardly an argument.

The word "primary" is not in your quote. For all we know it could be a tertiary factor, but you are changing the facts to make it seem like it's the most important factor.

This is nothing but cognitive dissonance on your part; you know as well as I do that this government source is saying that if the person was not drinking Alcohol that they would most likely not have done what they did. You could use the tertiary factor for guns, you could argue that the primary cause of the gun crime was not the gun but rather the person taunting you made you upset. You could argue that the primary cause of gun crimes in Chicago is not the gun but the turf wars in Chicago and the taunting on social media. You could argue that the primary factor in gun suicides isn't the gun but the economic situation of those who commit suicides.

Important to note you asked for numbers in which someone had drank and had killed, you didn't ask for it to be the primary factor, just only that it be involved in the incident:

how many alcohol deaths involve someone other than the person who drank compared

I have shown that nearly 50% of homicides involve alcohol.

Good evidence, but it doesn't support your case that alcohol is the primary factor in these violent crimes.

How many of those crimes do you believe would have occurred if the people had not consumed Alcohol? Clearly this government source believes that a very significant amount would not and considering we are talking millions of crimes here and we are talking about ~100K gun crimes that caused a physical wound we would then only need ~3% of the crimes here in order to match the gun crime rate.

Again you asked for numbers in which someone had drank and had killed, you didn't ask for it to be the primary factor, just only that it be involved in the incident:

how many alcohol deaths involve someone other than the person who drank compared

This is very moving, but it's not relevant to our discussion.

True.

You haven't shown the information I asked for, which is evidence that alcohol causes the deaths of people who don't choose to drink alcohol.

What would be the point in only including homicide victims that choose not to drink?

You want to make out that alcohol is worse than guns, that's the information you need.

It does, the raw numbers show Alcohol kills and injuries far more people than firearms(Suicides, Accidents, and Homicides).

That's the problem.

Can you show me a gun control organization that says only gun homicides in which the victim does not believe in guns is the problem?

Japan is a great example of how gun control works. Very little crime across the board....that means katana-related violence are rare too. But gun-nuts are just that, nuts.

Those folks that got murdered and wounded were/are victims of stupid laws. Each state has different laws, each airline handles weapons differently, law enforcement organizations are so ununified that it is pathetic. The United States of Ametica should be renamed as the ununited states of america. Lol

The FBI dropped the ball on this one. He was taken to a mental hospital. Why on earth was this nutjob released and not monitored?

RIP to the victims. Condolences to their families and friends. Another sad day in the US.

Another individual who had returned from another American war; a man who for whatever reasons had mental and/or emotional issues. He was living in a country long known, especially since Reagan's presidency, for not doing enough to help people with mental and emotional problems.

The man is a citizen of and living in a country where guns are integral to the fabric of a large, violent segment of a violent society.

I have to assume that once again as a result of this catastrophe many American gun lovers went out and purchased more guns and ammo. Once again the gun industry will see increased sales.

There are reasons many countries issue travel warnings to their citizens traveling to the US.

"Guns again?" Hmmm, don't see anyone blaming the perpetrator. Should I be surprised, Nope!

At least one US toddler has shot himself or someone else every week for the last two years.

But the guns are innocent. Oh yes.

http://www.pressunion.org/2016-toddler-now-shot-person-every-week-us-two-years-straight/

Airline passengers, including ones with mental health problems, allowed to pack along their guns and ammo: what could possibly go wrong?

This will be an extremely tough law to change. They may be able to outlaw the ammo , though. They are a form of explosive. Just, not for everyone.

Americans' underlying attitude is kind of like 'shoganai' to me. As long as no one you know or love is hurt or killed, it's basically read the story and move on. Never learn.

The constitution should be amended, guns should be made illegal, and those who refuse to turn them in should be arrested.

Thank God, that's never going to happen.

It would be a hell of a disruption, but Trump could do it! He can do anything!

He also wants to be elected to a second term.

I have to assume that once again as a result of this catastrophe many American gun lovers went out and purchased more guns and ammo. Once again the gun industry will see increased sales.

I don't see why not, they're not the issue.

There are reasons many countries issue travel warnings to their citizens traveling to the US.

What are the stats on foreigners being killed while traveling in the US?

At least one US toddler has shot himself or someone else every week for the last two years. But the guns are innocent. Oh yes.

Yes.....The owner of the gun is to blame for the unauthorized access, not the gun itself. That is a little obvious....

Americans' underlying attitude is kind of like 'shoganai' to me. As long as no one you know or love is hurt or killed, it's basically read the story and move on. Never learn.

Never learn what? You do realize that there is zero obligation to do anything.

Gun control has been a great success in Australia going from a gun massacre every 1.5 years before the controls were brought in, to none in the last 20 years.

A. Australia has had gun massacres since the Port Arthur massacre:

Hectorville shooting Monash University shooting Hunt Family shooting

B. And finally that isn't really that impressive, the 1.5 figure is basically saying you reduced the gun deaths by 6 people for an entire year for the entire nation. Imagine if I went to Australia and said if you raised your minimum drinking age to 21 you could reduce Alcohol fueled homicides for the entire year for the entire population by 6 people. I doubt many Australians would be impressed and would agree to raise their minimum drinking age to 21.

Then of course you bring in New Zealand which did not ban the guns that Australia has done and yet they themselves have also not had a gun massacre int he same amount of time.

Airline passengers, including ones with mental health problems, allowed to pack along their guns and ammo: what could possibly go wrong?

It is not really a question of what could go wrong it is more of a question of how frequently it could go wrong and how bad it is when it does go wrong. At the current rate the car ride to and from the airport is more likely to kill you.

Moderator: Sorry but we have already ruled that comparisons to other countries are not relevant to this discussion. Nor is alcohol.

At least one US toddler has shot himself or someone else every week for the last two years. But the guns are innocent. Oh yes.

Yes they are, the ones that are guilty are those that allowed the unauthorized access to the gun in the first place. That is a little obvious SenseNotSoCommon.

Americans' underlying attitude is kind of like 'shoganai' to me. As long as no one you know or love is hurt or killed, it's basically read the story and move on. Never learn.

@Mocheake - Never learn what? If America wants to say that one hundredth of one percent of the population dying from guns is acceptable then what is wrong with that? You can't have zero deaths with any product and have it be legal.

Gun control in Australia has been a success. Just ask Australians

@Stranger- To be fair American style gun control has also been a success, gun homicides are basically down by nearly half on a per capita basis in the past 20 years and non-fatal gun assaults are down just under 70% on a per capita basis in the past 20 years.