Army recruiting station attacked in Arkansas

[bbdub333]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,523860,00.html

DEVELOPING: A gunman opened fire Monday at an army recruitment center in Little Rock, Ark., killing one army recruiter and seriously wounding another, FOX16.com reported.

A man in a black SUV drove to the recruitment office and began shooting at around 10:19 a.m., a spokesman with the Little Rock police department told FOX News.

The suspect, who immediately fled the scene, was later apprehended approximately four miles from the center with an assault rifle in his vehicle.

Little Rock authorities detected a "suspicious device" inside the vehicle and called a bomb squad to the scene, according to FOX16.com.

Ironic how this comes after so many comments in the abortion doctor thread stating that right-wing activists use violence against people and left-wing activists use non-violent protest.

They apprehended the suspect, so hopefully we'll soon know what his motives were.

 

[her209]

I thought "left wing activists" were anti-gun?

 

[MotF Bane]

Here's a novel concept: you get crazies from either side. It proves NOTHING.

 

[fallout man]

Originally posted by: her209
I thought "left wing activists" were anti-gun?

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: her209
I thought "left wing activists" were anti-gun?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Ironic how this comes after so many comments in the abortion doctor thread stating that right-wing activists use violence against people and left-wing activists use non-violent protest.

They apprehended the suspect, so hopefully we'll soon know what his motives were.

Why is it ironic? All the story at your link or any other I've found says is that the shooter is identified only as "a man in a black SUV" and that he fired "several shots" with an assault rifle.

What evidence do you have that he was a "left-wing activist?"

Regardless of the shooter's motive, what makes you think libs would find this shooting is any more or less acceptable than the shooting of the doctor who performed abortions?

The only thing we know, so far, is that it strengthens the case for banning assault weapons. :thumbsup:

 

[Robor]

Troll post. I predict the OP looks like a fool (again).

 

[Steeplerot]

Black Suv, assault rifle? Yep sounds exactly like the evil leftie terrorists. /sarcasm


This is a vet or someone who got booted from the military.

Fox is in damage control mode today I see.

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: fallout man

Originally posted by: her209
I thought "left wing activists" were anti-gun?

Only when they are trying to take away _your_ guns. Look at history. When the left wanted to take over governments, it was okay for them to use guns.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Ironic how this comes after so many comments in the abortion doctor thread stating that right-wing activists use violence against people and left-wing activists use non-violent protest.

They apprehended the suspect, so hopefully we'll soon know what his motives were.

Why is it ironic? All the story at your link or any other I've found says is that the shooter is identified only as "a man in a black SUV" and that he fired "several shots" with an assault rifle.

What evidence do you have that he was a "left-wing activist?"

Regardless of the shooter's motive, what makes you think libs would find this shooting is any more or less acceptable than the shooting of the doctor who performed abortions?

The only thing we know, so far, is that it strengthens the case for banning assault weapons. :thumbsup:

My comment is in reply to such statements as:

Originally posted by: Phokus
Most leftwing 'terrorists' will target a housing development or a hummer dealership (for example) when no people are around. The rightwing terrorists (whether here or abroad) will always resort to violence.

As ignorant a comment as that was, mine is made somewhat in jest.

Either way, as I said, we don't know the motive of the shooter yet.

Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed
Fox is in damage control mode today I see.

Any basis for that idiotic comment?

 

[Genx87]

I see three ditto heads quoting each other. When the left is anti-gun, it means they want to take your guns.

That said we dont know the ideology of the person doing the shooting. So it is a jump to conclusion that it is a lefty.

 

[fallout man]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I see three ditto heads quoting each other. When the left is anti-gun, it means they want to take your guns.

That said we dont know the ideology of the person doing the shooting. So it is a jump to conclusion that it is a lefty.

So "the lefties" want to take whose gun?

Who's on second?

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I see three ditto heads quoting each other. When the left is anti-gun, it means they want to take your guns.

That said we dont know the ideology of the person doing the shooting. So it is a jump to conclusion that it is a lefty.

Yes, but it's such a politically convenient conclusion for the OP to jump to

 

[NeoV]

I love how 'sensible gun laws' equates to 'the left wants to take your guns'

Both sides are so paranoid it's hard to have a normal discussion about anything these days

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

OP is on thin ice here and should start baking his humble pie.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: bbdub333

My comment is in reply to such statements as:

Originally posted by: Phokus
Most leftwing 'terrorists' will target a housing development or a hummer dealership (for example) when no people are around. The rightwing terrorists (whether here or abroad) will always resort to violence.

As ignorant a comment as that was, mine is made somewhat in jest.

Considering the serious nature of the topic, so much for the idea that you have any sense of humor. :roll:

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: bbdub333

My comment is in reply to such statements as:

Originally posted by: Phokus
Most leftwing 'terrorists' will target a housing development or a hummer dealership (for example) when no people are around. The rightwing terrorists (whether here or abroad) will always resort to violence.

As ignorant a comment as that was, mine is made somewhat in jest.

Considering the serious nature of the topic, so much for the idea that you have any sense of humor. :roll:

There is nothing funny about Phokus as proven here.

 

[JSt0rm]

I'm at work but do we know a motive or are we just assuming this is a left wing thing?

 

[n yusef]

Anyone slightly educated knows that not all Left-wing movements are anti-gun or anti-violence. And I suppose some Right-wing movements are peaceful.

We shouldn't pretend that all violence is equal. Slave masters killed in violent rebellions deserve less sympathy than abortion providers.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
I'm at work but do we know a motive or are we just assuming this is a left wing thing?

ROP :Q

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: bbdub333

My comment is in reply to such statements as:

Originally posted by: Phokus

Most leftwing 'terrorists' will target a housing development or a hummer dealership (for example) when no people are around. The rightwing terrorists (whether here or abroad) will always resort to violence.

As ignorant a comment as that was, mine is made somewhat in jest.

Considering the serious nature of the topic, so much for the idea that you have any sense of humor. :roll:

There is nothing funny about Phokus as proven here.

I'm not arguing your point. His is that, statistically, there are a number of very vocal, organized right wing groups who openly advocate violence against those who provide abortion services, most of which justify their positions on religious grounds.

My comment was directed at bbdub333's statement that his comment was "made somewhat in jest." I don't see anything funny about anyone or any group from any side advocating or carrying out violence in furtherance of their political or social views.

 

[OCGuy]

Yes, because FARC fights with fists only.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: MotF Bane
Here's a novel concept: you get crazies from either side. It proves NOTHING.

This. Although I think that was the OP's point; the other thread had the lefties pointing at the righties and crying "you horrible crazies!" This may possibly be a good example of the reverse, although there currently is no information about the shooter so it's entirely possible that the OP's illustration of the point could backfire. Although it remains valid.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: bbdub333

My comment is in reply to such statements as:

Originally posted by: Phokus

Most leftwing 'terrorists' will target a housing development or a hummer dealership (for example) when no people are around. The rightwing terrorists (whether here or abroad) will always resort to violence.

As ignorant a comment as that was, mine is made somewhat in jest.

Considering the serious nature of the topic, so much for the idea that you have any sense of humor. :roll:

There is nothing funny about Phokus as proven here.

I don't see anything funny in any of this. Quite the reverse.

I'm not arguing your point. His is that, statistically, there are a number of very vocal, organized right wing groups who openly advocate violence against those who provide abortion services, most of which justify their positions on religious grounds.

My comment was directed at bbdub333's statement that his comment was "made somewhat in jest." I don't see anything funny about anyone or any group from any side advocating or carrying out violence in furtherance of their political or social views.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: MotF Bane
Here's a novel concept: you get crazies from either side. It proves NOTHING.

This. Although I think that was the OP's point; the other thread had the lefties pointing at the righties and crying "you horrible crazies!" This may possibly be a good example of the reverse, although there currently is no information about the shooter so it's entirely possible that the OP's illustration of the point could backfire. Although it remains valid.

Without data any speculation is pointless.

Even it did turn out that a Leftist group was responsible for this it would be wrong to generalize. Heaven knows there are enough violent militant groups from both left and right throughout the world, however most people are sane and non violent. This guy isn't representative of the left if he's part of it.