GayBoard

Raventsvo wrote:

Yes.
Sometime long ago, the wisest men of Canadia got together to design a flag. the wisest amongst them picked up a leaf from the ground and said "this... this is what I want to represent my country"

Yeah, we don't even know why the maple leaf became an emblem of Canada. It just has been since the 1700s.

Heck, before we adopted O Canada as a national anthem (unofficially in the 1930s and officially in 1980) our de facto national anthem was a song called "The Maple Leaf Forever".

Hello! Sorry to break your beautiful number of 333 nations, but on the bright side you're now one nation closer to 666!

Fiordlandia v wrote:

Hello! Sorry to break your beautiful number of 333 nations, but on the bright side you're now one nation closer to 666!

Yay! We're more than half evil!

http://opinion.injo.com/2016/06/256993-im-former-nypd-heres-why-i-suspect-there-was-more-than-one-shooter-in-orlando/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=owned&utm_campaign=ods&utm_term=ijamerica&utm_content=crime

I agree with much of this article.

Oneracon wrote:

I don't like the authors' root idea that this was primarily a religious terrorist attack rather than an anti-LGBT terrorist attack, honestly it feels like yet another part in the erasure narrative

I can see that. I shared the article because the media's math doesn't add up. I myself am a marksman, and have experience with AR-15's. I wanna know where he got all that ammo if it's really a single shooter, and how he was so proficient in his shooting. I mean, I was on rifle team for 4 years, and the first time I fired an AR I couldn't hit crap. The shooting doesn't add up and I don't feel like the full story is here, or the media is making up numbers and stretching the truth. This was a horrible incident and it needs to be reported correctly.

Otis-T wrote:

I can see that. I shared the article because the media's math doesn't add up. I myself am a marksman, and have experience with AR-15's. I wanna know where he got all that ammo if it's really a single shooter, and how he was so proficient in his shooting. I mean, I was on rifle team for 4 years, and the first time I fired an AR I couldn't hit crap. The shooting doesn't add up and I don't feel like the full story is here, or the media is making up numbers and stretching the truth. This was a horrible incident and it needs to be reported correctly.

The article seems to ignore three other facts (I use the term in a general sense; they are of course debatable if necessary):

1. The shooter worked for private security company G4S as an armed guard for about 10 years, so he would have been trained to use guns. Therefore his accuracy rate would reasonably be higher than the article's estimate of about 20%, which I assume is for police shooting at moving targets in open areas.

2. He used an AR-15 assault rifle. Why isn't this mentioned in the article?

3. There were about 30 people in a single bathroom at Pulse of which only 1 survived. So the death toll would be higher than would be expected if the gunman had to shoot at targets across a large room in the dark.

Otis-T wrote:

1. Armed security isn't trained as well as officers and infantry, or marksmen.
2. the Sig Sauer MCX rifle is an AR-15.
3. That is true, but then there are about 70 more he shot.

1. Also, he was on an elite special forces level of shooting of he was a loan gunman. He still hit 70 other people.

Raventsvo wrote:

Wow, I'm freezing

We had snow here in parts near the mountains yesterday, odd for us.

Otis-T wrote:

1. Also, he was on an elite special forces level of shooting of he was a loan gunman. He still hit 70 other people.

Thanks for clearing up the Sig Sauer AR-15 point.

But the point is, if the questionable assumptions are taken out of the article, the gunman doesn't need an elite special forces level of shooting...

Hi I'm Sarah.

You know we did the whole rainbow region flag and RMB thing before it was cool. ;)

Vampkyrie wrote:

Yay! We're more than half evil!

nah you see, we're 1 percent evil, ninety-nine percent hot gas.