#DisarmHate.

DisarmhateBy Scott Ragsdale

Omar Mateen kills 49 people with an assault rifle that was banned from civilian use until 2004.  It takes the 9th longest filibuster in the senates history, by a Marine vet, for debate to reach the floor – first debate and vote in a decade.

Free market gun advocates and their conservative politicians, on both sides of the aisle, are protecting a culture of intimidation and violence.  There is no restriction on the sale of the SIG SAUER MCX assault rifles like the one used in Orlando, there is no sanction on the company that licenses the manufacture of SIG SAUER – the Swiss owned holding company L&O Holdings. There is no law punishing the retailer who sold the gun. It’s against the law for the Federal government to study how to prevent gun violence. All because of a distorted interpretation of the 2nd amendment.

This has got to change and it has changed in California.  The legislature voted for establishing a firearm violence research center, the senate approved measures banning rifles with detachable magazines and requiring background checks for ammo buyers.  It’s still legal to buy a gun at a gun show and to trade a gun without a background check.

This is the issue – domestic gun violence kills 30,000 US citizens a year.  Hate mongers are using legal weapons for politically motivated mass shootings. Join us with Mom’s Demand Action  – Lobby Day in Sacramento June 22nd.  #DisarmHate.

About The Author

Disclaimer: the views expressed by guest writers are strictly those of the author and may not reflect the views of the Vanguard, its editor, or its editorial board.

Related posts

42 Comments

  1. zaqzaq

    This is just another gun control group shrouding itself in an anti hate message.  The real focus should be on ISIS and Islam.  ISIS sells non-Muslim women into (sex) slavery, burns POWs alive and executes homosexuals by throwing them off the roofs of tall buildings.  You can watch videos of all of these after a simple Google search.  Only in a Muslim country can a woman who is a rape survivor be convicted of adultery for the sex act that constituted the rape.  Woman are second class citizens in the eyes of Islam.  The terrorist in Orlando targeted a homosexual bar because in Islam homosexuals are less than human and executing them is authorized.  If you want to stop hate messages we must destroy ISIS and pressure Islam to reform it’s message of hate and sexism.

    1. David Greenwald

      Why do you believe that the focus should be on ISIS and Islam? From listening to the guy’s ex-wife, I think he would have had problems regardless. I think the real issue should be mental health and ease of availability of weapons.

        1. hpierce

          Right… words from a young man who exhibited mental illness even as a child, and while he is committing these crimes, claims allegiance to ISIS, and to a suicide bomber who opposed ISIS… all “very credible”…  not. This person was mentally disturbed…

          [edited]
          Islam, as a faith, is not a problem…

          Jews stoned and/or  killed folk for adultery (or any ‘heresy’)… Christians gave us the Inquisition and witch burning, atheists/agnostics have their own history of infamy… Buddhists/Shinto folk gave us Pearl Harbor, Nanking, Bataan death march (or were those atheists/agnostics?).  Name one belief system (or non-belief system) that has not committed atrocities… Richard Nixon professed being a Quaker! [Society of Friends]

          ISIS is one thing… Islam is another… most Muslims, world-wide, repudiate ISIS, al-quida, etc., and don’t know of any Catholic who says Hitler was acting according to his nominal ‘faith’.

          Yet, it was folk who followed Islamic beliefs who saved/harbored Jews in Vichy France, at great personal risk if the Nazis found out.  Historically, the teachings of Islam spring from Judeo/Christian roots.  They acknowledge Abraham, Jesus, Mary as important prophets/role-models.

        2. David Greenwald

          True, but my guess is if it wasn’t ISIS, it would have been something else. The guy was a time bomb, he simply latched onto something accessible.

          1. Don Shor

            This guys was less of an “Islamist” than Dylan Roof was a “Christianist” — after all, Roof expressed allegiance and admiration for the KKK.

          2. Don Shor

            One day, he claims to be a member of Hezbollah, which is a Shiite organization. Another day, his family is connected to al-Qaida. And then he praised just before he was killed an individual who was a suicide bomber for al-Nusra, an entity that is not in good terms with ISIS.

            And then he gave his regards and admiration for the Boston bombers, two individuals who have nothing to do with ISIS. ISIS in this case appeared to have no idea about what this guy did. They didn’t control his operation. They don’t appear to be directing that operation.

            And even their alleged claim of responsibility was based on circular media, was based on what they are gathering of U.S. media regarding that operation. So now we have a case of an individual who went to do his crime and at the last second he said, oh, by the way, I am ISIS.

            Not a real cohesive Islamist philosophy. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/finding-the-terror-needles-in-the-domestic-haystack/

          1. Don Shor

            I wonder why it’s so important to conservatives that a mentally ill violent man who committed this atrocity be labeled as an “Islamic” terrorist. First of all, “Islamic” is not the operative modifier; it would be “Islamist.” “Islamic” is simply someone who is of the Muslim faith, comparable to calling Dylan Roof a “Christian terrorist.”
            Was Dylan Roof a Christian terrorist?
            It isn’t relevant whether you consider PBS biased or not. The question is whether the analyst made an accurate assessment. If you think he’s lying about the perpetrator’s befuddlement about different terrorist groups, then I guess you need to provide some evidence.
            To call him an “Islamic terrorist” is not merely incorrect in word usage, it is an oversimplification of what appears to have motivated him.

          2. David Greenwald

            By what definition? It appears that mental illness was a better explanation than religious motivations. It’s not even clear that he had an actual contact with the terror organization.

        3. Barack Palin

          He had logged onto ISIS websites.  He didn’t have to have direct contact to act in sympathey with ISIS.  His father was/is pro-Taliban.  ISIS puts out directives all the time for sympathizers to act.

          1. David Greenwald

            I guess I just don’t understand – his classmates described him as mean and violent. His wife described him as abusive and bipolar. To me this is clear mental illness where he latched onto a convenient target.

        4. Barack Palin

          Okay David, maybe it’s both.  You have to be deranged in the first place to do an act like that.

          Have a good day, I’m done here for now. At least we can chat without making out of bounds personal comments about each other like we all saw earlier.

        5. Eric Gelber

          Mental illness is too convenient an explanation. The vast majority of people labeled mentally ill are not violent. Even if someone exhibiting violence is mentally ill, mental illness is not necessarily the primary cause. There are far more reliable predictors of violence–e.g., drug and alcohol abuse, history of violence, etc. The need to expand access to mental health treatment is undeniable. However, the focus on mental illness in relation to mass murders is a distraction. It diverts attention from the number one issue–absurdly easy access to firearms, especially assault weapons.

        6. zaqzaq

          Why is it so important for liberals to label those who are radicalized Islamic terrorists as mentally ill.  Don and David made the pathetic attempt here.  The mass killing events at Fort Hood, Orlando, Boston, Bakersfield and in Europe all have a common theme, Islam.  Not mental illness.  Nice try guys.

          PS.  I am for banning assault weapon sales to civilians.  Please try not to pin a label on me that does not fit.

          1. Don Shor

            I would say that someone with a long history of serious anger and domestic abuse, described by his ex-wife as bipolar, who walks into a nightclub and methodically murders several dozen people is probably mentally ill. But that’s just me.
            Again: “Islamic” is a misuse of the word. There is no evidence that the Orlando killer was tied in with any Islamist group in any way. If you’re going to insist on attaching the label in these instances, please use the right label.
            Was Dylan Roof a Christian terrorist? For some reason conservatives don’t insist on calling him that. I guess he was just mentally ill and had a thing about black people.

          2. David Greenwald

            It seems like you are cherry picking a few events and as Don points out ignoring hundreds of others. You seem to be arguing that the ones with potential Islamic motivations are different. I think it’s more likely that these all have commonalities with other mass shootings than with organized terrorism.

            “Why is it so important for liberals to label those who are radicalized Islamic terrorists as mentally ill. ”

            Because it’s important to properly characterize events, right? Just assuming that they are terrorist in origin may focus us in the wrong direction and the cure. I suspect this guy in Orlando would have found another cause or excuse to kill without ISIS, in fact, there’s ample evidence to support it. “Don and David made the pathetic attempt here.” That’s insulting and it’s an assertion without good argument.

        7. hpierce

          BP… if you think I’m ‘deflecting’, be very aware I’m not a Democrat… actually was registered as Republican for the primary (so I could vote for Kasich), but immediately re-registered as NP (no party)… am fed up with the lot (all ‘Parties’) and have been for 30 years…

        8. zaqzaq

          David and Don are now self proclaimed mental health experts.  Don even feels comfortable making a medical diagnosis claiming that the Orlando shooter is bipolar.   ISIS and groups like it use propaganda to recruit individuals to their cause and encourage lone wolf acts of terrorism such as occurred in Orlando.  Targeting a gay bar is also consistent with the beliefs of ISIS and Islam that homosexuality is a crime.  The incidents I cited all include radicalized Islamic thought.  Not mental illness.  The claim of mental illness in the Orlando instance and the others that I cite is the liberals way of sticking your head in the sand on this issue.  You guys cannot even acknowledge the hate inherent in ISIS and Islam looking at the way both treat women and homosexuals.  For example rape victims are victims and not adulterers who should be prosecuted.  Or do you guys agree with these tenets of Islam?

          1. Don Shor

            Was Dylan Wolf a Christian terrorist? I keep asking, but you don’t seem willing to answer.
            The common characteristic of most mass shooters is that they were angry young men.
            Of course there is hate inherent in ISIS. And the KKK, of course. Obviously I don’t support the grotesque interpretations of Islam that you are citing. Of course I could find similar examples of mistreatment of women and gays and others by contemporary Christians; just look at the anti-gay laws being passed in various African countries such as Uganda (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_Anti-Homosexuality_Act,_2014). Note the American religious leader promoting that and other anti-gay measures (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Lively).
            Is Dylan Roof a Christian terrorist?

          2. David Greenwald

            And you’re a so-proclaimed expert on terrorism? It seems this works both ways

        9. Barack Palin

          I found this quote and feel it hits the mark when it comes to liberal PC views.

          So, let me see if I have this straight. If an individual with a penis says he’s a woman, I must accept that as fact. BUT, if a guy says he’s with the Islamic State, wages Islamic jihad, and the Islamic State claims responsibility for him and his actions, I can’t believe he has anything to do with the Islamic State because “just because he said it doesn’t make it true!” Is that about right?

          1. David Greenwald

            And I would argue that quote demonstrates the right wing’s misunderstanding of both.

          1. David Greenwald

            We’ll have to agree to disagree. Perhaps when I get bored at some point I will write a full article explaining why it’s misguided.

    2. Barack Palin

      Just learned yesterday that Obama is speeding up refugee immigration with plans to bring in over a million Muslims.  Remember when we were lied to that it was only going to be in the tens of thousands, no one ever said a million.  With the acceleration there will be less time for proper vetting and harder to weed out possible terrorists.  How many more Orlando like incidents will Obama’s actions spawn?

      1. Eric Gelber

        Someone’s been reading too much Breitbart. There’s no such plan. The one million is the projected number of immigrants from all Muslim-majority countries during the entirety of the Obama administration. That has little to do with the issue of Syrian refugees.

    3. Tia Will

      zaqzaq

      Long before we were worried about ISIS there were those who were willing to resort to violence to impose their will on others. Timothy McVeigh, the Columbine shooters, the man who shot Gabby Giffords, Adam Lanza, none of these murderers had anything to do with ISIS or Islamic jihad. We have upwards of 3o,000 gun related deaths a year in this country and you want to focus on the < 70 caused by those who make a claim of jihadist motivation ?  These numbers simply do not add up for me.

      1. zaqzaq

        Then you would agree that this whole “#Disarmhate” title is just gun control activists making a pathetic attempt to shroud there argument in an anit-hate message.  We now have the Boston bombers, Fort Hood shooting, Bakersfield shooting and now Orlando.  All in the name of Islam against the corrupt west.  Then look at Europe and the shootings and bombings there in the name of Islam.  There is a clear problem with radicalized Islam.  Orlando is just another example.  If you want to make it about disarming hate then focus on Qatar and UAE where rape victims are prosecuted for adultery for the sex that took place during their rapes.  ISIS stones women to death for adultery.  How about the inherent sexism in Islam?  It is a religion that demeans women.

        Concerning the legality of military type assault weapons I see no legitimate reason that a civilian needs to own an assault weapon.  In California Kamala Harris has been pathetic in this area failing to take any leadership role as the California Attorney General.  Her department has failed to take any position on the legality of the “bullet button” which is a device used to circumvent to current assault weapon laws in this state.  Just plain pathetic and now she is the front runner for Senate.  It just shows how far she can go [edited]

        [moderator] removed offensive comment

        1. Tia Will

          My position is that there is no need to pretend that there is a single issue and that the issue is jihadist ideology. I believe that any one who takes a firearm and kills innocents is equally culpable whether they claim their goal is to kill infidels, or blacks, or gays, or politicians that they do not like, or doctors providing legal medical services. Their action is the same, and they should be treated the same.

          I do not see the need to make negative comments about any group that is attempting to lessen these kinds of attacks on innocent civilians. I do not believe that there is anything “pathetic” about a public rejection of violence.

        2. zaqzaq

          The husband and wife team that shot up the Christmas party.  If that was Riverside and not Bakersfield my error.  They acted as a team and were clearly not mentally ill.  They definitely had a radical Islam theme.

          1. David Greenwald

            The Riverside shooting definitely had a strong tie to international terrorism although even there, the man was describe as having “self-radicalized.”

        3. zaqzaq

          Tia,

          The article is titled disarm hate.  ISIS and Islam hate.  The Orlando shooting was based on radical Islam.  If the article has a title concerning gun control that is one thing but it was not.  It was a pathetic attempt to get the LGBT community to support gun control.  Two distinct issues.  Obama’s Syria policies have failed.  Women, homosexuals, Christians and those with other faiths are all being brutalized by ISIS.  When you link Orlando to hate the bullseye goes on Islam.

  2. Jerry Waszczuk

    The  our problem with Muslims  is  how the western civilization got to this point after the WW II.  It is a very complex problem .

    I am amazed by  the State of Israel which is big as  one of the California’s county  and has only around 6 million people. The country is full of Hamas and other radicals and Israel is not afraid of ISIS, Al-Queda , Muslim Brotherhood , Hezbollah , Al -Shabab. etc. Israel is surrounded by 21 Arabs countries and is not afraid of them .

    On other side we have USA , the most powerful country and  the NATO countries with the enormous military capabilities and we can not to make quiet  a few thousands bandits from ISIS . Sometimes I think that because no Soviet Union anymore than the  different “scare crow” is needed to keep empire in tact .

  3. Ron

    Just wondering . . .

    What qualifies as a “religion”?  If someone expouses a violent offshoot of some religion (e.g., adherence to ISIS), does that “disqualify” them from calling themselves religious?  Also, are there aspects in some (if not all) “religions” that could be interpreted by some as an advocacy for violence? (Perhaps even stated directly, in more “mainstream” religious documents?)  (I’m not an expert in religion, but have picked up pieces here and there.)

    Regarding this particular incident, I doubt that there’s an easy answer to prevent these incidents from occurring in the future.  However, it’s pretty clear to me that it’s too easy to obtain an assault weapon. (Ridiculously easy, it seems.)

  4. Tia Will

    zaqzaq

    Don even feels comfortable making a medical diagnosis claiming that the Orlando shooter is bipolar.   “

    First, Don did not state that the Orlando shooter was bipolar. He stated that his wife made this comment.

    Now to the issue you addressed to me. Yes, ISIS does seem to operate largely on a basis of hatred. But they are far from alone in this practice. Islamic jihadists are not the only group that preaches hatred of gays as witnessed by a supposed “Baptist preacher” supporting these actions and calling on the government to take on the role of killing gays. What I do not understand is your apparent desire to pin violence and gay hatred on one group only when it is clear that we have equally hateful people, some capable of extreme violence who adhere to other religions.

    Again, I do not see any attempt to enlist people in a movement to decrease violence in this country through peaceful means as pathetic. Do you find efforts by mothers to decrease gun violence pathetic ? How about members of a particular congregation attempting to decrease gun violence, or medical professionals acting together to end gun violence ?  I am unclear what it is about this particular effort to enlist those of the LGBT community ( who were directly targeted in this event) in efforts to decrease gun violence that you find pathetic.

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for