3 killed in Chicago by a white man with gun. Multiple injured and one killed in Denver as well.

[jhungary]

Exactly what I was trying to do. Grab a taxi out of O'Hare to the South side at midnight?

He probably not going to make it out of O'Hare and get that far...…..The way he describe the US, he probably will get mug immediately after leaving TSA.

 

[VCheng]

He probably not going to make it out of O'Hare and get that far...…..The way he describe the US, he probably will get mug immediately after leaving TSA.

You mean someone will want his fake Nike shoes and knock-off LV jacket that badly?

 

[Amaa'n]

But I lost how you can compare a person kills 3 in a hospital to US Foreign Policy. Maybe you can connect it somehow, I can't.



What's that have to do with my post?



And he wonder why he will be shot on arrival in the United States lol.

I think I would probably be shot if I arrive in China with a RPG on my hand.

Why am I not surprised ......am actually laughing my tush off here on what youbhave just said......
You actually lost with your 'Domestic Crime' thing toi, somehow one crimes gets to be debated in the congress and how its the constitutional right while for the other one yu folks just invade countries.......its funny isn't it?

Seems like YOU are.


Given your claim of being 'well versed' with the US Constitution, I would like to see where in the US Constitution does terrorism mentioned.

Show me where I had mentioned ' US Constitution' ......and unlike you am still in my late 20s with actually a job to go to.....why not just ignore all I said and simply answer my question.....

 

[jhungary]

jumping to conclusion to quickly, aren't we?
Read my post again I am asking how 'you' would define terrorism not how Constitution defines it.
Otherwise am well versed with the Definition in the constitution......but since we are talking bout perception, and how an act is perceived and labeled.........it would be interesting to see what terrorism is to you......to me terrorism is 'mass murder' with no regards to religion, race, or political affiliations

terrorism in itself have to be political affiliated, otherwise it would just be a normal crime.

The concept of "Mass Murder" is too board, if all mass murder is considered Terrorism, then you would have to set up federal task force to investigate all type of mass killing, including serial killer, or even accidental killing (or involuntary manslaughter.)

We as a private citizen can afford to name your own label, of course you can call a serial killer a terrorist, but for most part of a country, calling something or someone "Terrorist" or "Terrorism" would have repercussion, which is not something we can just say or just define out of our own thinking. You can afford that, society as a whole cannot.

 

[gambit]

Show me where I had mentioned ' US Constitution'...

Then what do you mean when you used the word 'constitution'?

......and unlike you am still in my late 20s with actually a job to go to.....

How does this make you know what you are talking about when it comes to the US?

 

[jhungary]

You mean someone will want his fake Nike shoes and knock-off LV jacket that badly?

Remember? We are a bunch of redneck country, how do we know it is fake nike or knock off LV jacket?

lol, we will rob him and think we hit the jackpot.

 

[VCheng]

Remember? We are a bunch of redneck country, how do we know it is fake nike or knock off LV jacket?

lol, we will rob him and think we hit the jackpot.

Good point!

Do we shoot him before or after we rob him?

 

[gambit]

terrorism in itself have to be political affiliated, otherwise it would just be a normal crime.

The concept of "Mass Murder" is too board, if all mass murder is considered Terrorism, then you would have to set up federal task force to investigate all type of mass killing, including serial killer, or even accidental killing (or involuntary manslaughter.)

We as a private citizen can afford to name your own label, of course you can call a serial killer a terrorist, but for most part of a country, calling something or someone "Terrorist" or "Terrorism" would have repercussion, which is not something we can just say or just define out of our own thinking. You can afford that, society as a whole cannot.

The fact that he tried to conflate domestic crime with foreign affairs that have global consequences means he is not serious about the issue but -- trollling.

 

[jhungary]

Why am I not surprised ......am actually laughing my tush off here on what youbhave just said......
You actually lost with your 'Domestic Crime' thing toi, somehow one crimes gets to be debated in the congress and how its the constitutional right while for the other one yu folks just invade countries.......its funny isn't it?

First of all, DOMESTIC CRIME CAN HAVE INTERNATIONAL REPRECUSSION, did you realise this point?

If I kill a guy in California, that is a domestic crime, then I fled to say China, then the crime itself will still be domestic, but the nature itself has now gone international.

Actually, all crimes get debated in congress, as part of USC18, problem is, how you think one crime over the other is not going to be the same as per official definition, because again, we can call something on our own accord, but in term of law enforcement, and prosecution system, calling a crime differently would mean you need to involve different department.

So yes, if you commit a crime serious enough, say a domestic terrorist attack, and you fled to another country, and if your host country do not hand you over, then yes, you will be a subject of debate in congress on whether or not the US would use force to expedite you back. And yes, an invasion is one of the method we can be discussing here.

Good point!

Do we shoot him before or after we rob him?

Probably shoot him first, then rob him, because we are too stupid to even try to get his stuff intact first.

 

[BHarwana]

Lol

This is American thinking. Just look at it and this really tells you how low they have gone. The US media is telling you about how to survive mass shooting instead of raising voice on banning guns.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1063408845723131904

 

[jhungary]

The fact that he tried to conflate domestic crime with foreign affairs that have global consequences means he is not serious about the issue but -- trollling.

Well, just because it is a domestic crime, it does not mean the consequence stay domestic.

Also, he try to relate all domestic crime without the defined prescription of requirement is unfounded, a Murder charge is different than a Manslaughter charge, the basic concept of difference is Malice, which mean if we appear to have malice on one crime over the other, then one would be charge with Murder and the other will be manslaughter, and thus, the consequence are different, even tho both are domestic crime.

 

[gambit]

Lol

This is American thinking. Just look at it and this really tells you how low they have gone. The US media is telling you about how to survive mass shooting instead of raising voice on banning guns.

Lol...This just goes to show that you -- like the other guy -- are not serious. In the US, you cannot simply ban guns because the right to possess guns is secured in the US Constitution. So before you can ban guns, you must FIRST amend the US Constitution.

Well, just because it is a domestic crime, it does not mean the consequence stay domestic.

In your example, the consequence would be that of extradition. I was thinking in the line of Sept 11, 2001.

 

[Amaa'n]

First of all, DOMESTIC CRIME CAN HAVE INTERNATIONAL REPRECUSSION, did you realise this point?

If I kill a guy in California, that is a domestic crime, then I fled to say China, then the crime itself will still be domestic, but the nature itself has now gone international.

Actually, all crimes get debated in congress, as part of USC18, problem is, how you think one crime over the other is not going to be the same as per official definition, because again, we can call something on our own accord, but in term of law enforcement, and prosecution system, calling a crime differently would mean you need to involve different department.

So yes, if you commit a crime serious enough, say a domestic terrorist attack, and you fled to another country, and if your host country do not hand you over, then yes, you will be a subject of debate in congress on whether or not the US would use force to expedite you back. And yes, an invasion is one of the method we can be discussing here.
.

Tbh we are not even discussing the adventuresvof US here on the thread anyway but since you did bring it up nd evendid the ffort of defending it then let me just say it out, I had mentioned Middle East and Northern Africa....(MENA), nkt once I mentioned Afganistan or brought the issue of expedion......I spoke about domestic crimes done in a country and US invading and 'liberating' people.....?
No matter what you say or how you put it, the fact remains fact......you guys have double standards like we all do and we all have our way of perceiving things and we are no diiferent......so there is no need for a senior member like you to jump over nother member like that.....forum is to discuss, lets keep it civilized......

 

[jhungary]

Lol...This just goes to show that you -- like the other guy -- are not serious. In the US, you cannot simply ban guns because the right to possess guns is secured in the US Constitution. So before you can ban guns, you must FIRST amend the US Constitution.

banning gun? LOL

Most crime happen with illegal weapon (yes that include guns that belong to your family member and you use it illegally) Banning gun do nothing, it's like people trying to rob bank and because they would use car to escape the scene, maybe we should ban car ownership so people cannot escape after a heist..

 

[BHarwana]

When the killer is white his life is both unremarkable and troubled but he is not a terrorist. He is mentally sick the Pathetic state of American thinking. They will sells guns and destroy peace they they will make people suffer further but not giving justice to victims and then they will save the culprits as mentally sick people to keep business as usual. Lol lovely logic.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1064856343989944320