# Terrorists can strike any time, anywhere: Self defense saves lives.......



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Since at least 1950, every single mass public shooting in Europe (and all but two of the ones in the US) has occurred in gun-free zones.
Terrorists can strike any time, anywhere: Self defense saves lives | Fox News


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Funny thing, you never heard about mass shootings in the 50's. Yes there were a few unique cases, but nothing like we've seen over the past, say, 20+ years. I remember my mom telling me about Howard Unruh and his deadly walk of 12 minutes in which he killed 13 people in Camden, NJ. The first one I do recall was Charlie Starkweather and his girlfriend Carol who in 1957-58 killed eleven people in Nebraska. And the Clutter murders haunts me to this day (that's one that I just cannot get over).

The introduction of terrorists (they were never called this back "in the day") is a relatively new thing in this country. Charles Whitman and the Texas Tower murders were never referred to as a terrorist event... just a mass murdered on a rampage. The term terrorist, in its current vernacular, paints an entirely different and perhaps more insidious and malicious sort of killer. The tools they use, their tactics, their willingness to die in their escapades, and the utter spontaneous and random (to us) thrust of their attacks is all done to create maximum fear and cries of "Do anything, just save us" from the public. You couldn't write a better script to strip the People of their rights.

I am convinced that we are going to get hit again and its going to be at least as bad as 9/11. The terrorists ultimate goal and wish would be to explode a nuclear device in a major city. Few events would have the impact and significance as seeing a nuclear mushroom cloud over New York City, Washington, DC, or Chicago as this. This would be their dream attack. So don't live in large cities. They are prime targets in the minds of the terrorists.


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

Lets hope enough intelligent people read this and take action.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

I, too, think that the more organized of the terror groups will eventually score big, again. The demoralization of our once very good counter-intelligence community, and the upper echelons of the military in the last six years has to translate into more failures on their part. When we have directors of intelligence agencies and high placed generals bowing to politicians who will not even let them define who our enemies are, we are inviting failures of high magnitude. None of the 'tin pot' dictators of the world have any respect for our 'leaders,' making it much easier for radicals to obtain bigger weapons and more training.

Beyond that, our immigration failures have let in and continue to let people in who will willingly operate on their own to bring the less sophisticated terror attacks to any place in the country. It may just be a matter of time before we start seeing attacks on buses, trains, sporting events, schools, or any other place where large numbers of people gather into a small area.

For now, NYC seems to be the terrorist's fixation, but any place can be hit, and sooner or later, someone will start to 'think outside of the box' and recognize what opportunities exist, elsewhere.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Spot on, Bisley and I agree with your assessments.

Were I a terrorist, the prime targets would be those places where the public lives and operates and which they feel are pretty much safe and secure. Schools, shopping centers, churches, even neighborhoods. I would want to hit people where the both least expect it and where they just wouldn't consider a target. I would want to strike such fear in the people that they would be clamoring for the government to do anything, take any rights away from them in order to make them safe. Chaos would be my mantra and my agenda at the personal level to make the people afraid to do anything and to insist upon every intrusion by the government to stop the madness.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

The ringleaders think that way, now, I'm sure. Honestly, I don't know why they haven't done more.


----------



## hud35500 (May 8, 2010)

All you have to do is watch people going about their everyday lives to see how ignorant and uncaring they are when it comes to a crisis. 90% of the "sheeple" would be easy targets should terrorists attack. I am fortunate to have 30 years of LE/military experience to rely on, as do many members of this site, but we aren't enough to defend the clueless masses. I try to educate as many as possible to the eventual threat we face, but very few have the desire to step up and dedicate themselves. Eventually, just as on 9/11, this country will pay the price again for our lack of readiness.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

What is even more dangerous is the mindset of the occupant of the white house and his circle of friends. "No good crisis should go to waste", this quote tells us about their intentions, should another attack occur in the U.S.A. I am more concerned about their response to any attack than the attack itself. Yes the Terrorist are evil, but I consider those that refuse to confront evil as bad.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

hud35500 said:


> All you have to do is watch people going about their everyday lives to see how ignorant and uncaring they are when it comes to a crisis. 90% of the "sheeple" would be easy targets should terrorists attack. I am fortunate to have 30 years of LE/military experience to rely on, as do many members of this site, but we aren't enough to defend the clueless masses. I try to educate as many as possible to the eventual threat we face, but very few have the desire to step up and dedicate themselves. Eventually, just as on 9/11, this country will pay the price again for our lack of readiness.


OTOH, many countries see the apparent disregarding of a terrorist threat as not giving the terrorists what they want, which is (hence the name) causing terror in the countries they attack. Many places with a history of terrorism do NOT go around looking over their shoulders for the boogie-man - they simply go about their lives as if to say "We are NOT scared of you."


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

What actually surprises me is that the terrorists have not done much in America since 9/11...

Which is a good thing......


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

SailDesign said:


> Many places with a history of terrorism do NOT go around looking over their shoulders for the boogie-man - they simply go about their lives as if to say "We are NOT scared of you."


Maybe that's why they have a "history of terrorism."

Nothing says "We are NOT scared of you" better than overwhelming return fire.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/Keep-calm-and-carry-on-scan.jpg


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

Cait43 said:


> What actually surprises me is that the terrorists have not done much in America since 9/11...
> 
> Which is a good thing......


And also a bad thing. People are forgetting and thinking it won't happen here again. (In spite of the Boston Marathon bombing.) 
They're burying in their heads in the sand, expecting uncle barack to take care of and protect them.

Time to Lock and Load if you truly want to be safe.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

BackyardCowboy said:


> And also a bad thing. People are forgetting and thinking it won't happen here again. (In spite of the Boston Marathon bombing.)
> They're burying in their heads in the sand, expecting uncle barack to take care of and protect them.
> 
> Time to Lock and Load if you truly want to be safe.


Would armed people at the finish line have prevented the Boston bombing? That is the problem with "terrorists" as opposed to a pitched battle. They are usually not there when the gig goes down.


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

SailDesign said:


> Would armed people at the finish line have prevented the Boston bombing? That is the problem with "terrorists" as opposed to a pitched battle. They are usually not there when the gig goes down.


True as far as it goes. The Boston Marathon Bombing was a terrorist attack. The terrorists were home grown, but wanted to be like the others.
Could easily have been snipers at rooftop or window locations firing down on the runners and/or crowds.

Terrorism isn't done with US yet.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

BackyardCowboy said:


> True as far as it goes. The Boston Marathon Bombing was a terrorist attack. The terrorists were home grown, but wanted to be like the others.
> Could easily have been snipers at rooftop or window locations firing down on the runners and/or crowds.
> 
> Terrorism isn't done with US yet.


I wouldn't define snipers, etc. as terrorists - just as mass murderers. The whole idea of the "terror" part is to have it happen without any warning, and without anyone appearing immediately responsible. Hence the numerous TV spots stating "[insert terrorist group name here] claims responsibility for the bombing last Tuesday..."


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

SailDesign said:


> I wouldn't define snipers, etc. as terrorists - just as mass murderers. The whole idea of the "terror" part is to have it happen without any warning, and without anyone appearing immediately responsible. Hence the numerous TV spots stating "[insert terrorist group name here] claims responsibility for the bombing last Tuesday..."


Edit: But I agree with your last sentence. I don't think terrorism is done with ANYWHERE yet.


----------



## hud35500 (May 8, 2010)

Having visited many European countries during my time in the military, I can tell you for a fact that they go about their lives just as most Americans do, with blinders on. Eastern countries are a little different since most have experienced the ravages of armed conflict/ethnic cleansing, in recent years. Your average European subject is too busy texting on their iPhone and totally unaware of what is happening around them.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

SailDesign said:


> I wouldn't define snipers, etc. as terrorists - just as mass murderers. The whole idea of the "terror" part is to have it happen without any warning, and without anyone appearing immediately responsible. Hence the numerous TV spots stating "[insert terrorist group name here] claims responsibility for the bombing last Tuesday..."


Mass murder is terrorism, when done for political or religious purposes against non-combatants, and it doesn't really make much difference what 'devices' are used to change innocent people into innocent _dead_ people. Tolerating it, in any form, is insane.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

hud35500 said:


> Having visited many European countries during my time in the military, I can tell you for a fact that they go about their lives just as most Americans do, with blinders on. Eastern countries are a little different since most have experienced the ravages of armed conflict/ethnic cleansing, in recent years. Your average European subject is too busy texting on their iPhone and totally unaware of what is happening around them.


That's as may be, but I disagree strongly (but respectfully) that arming the world will decrease terrorism. All it will do is increase it among those who currently merely think of it.


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

SailDesign said:


> That's as may be, but I disagree strongly (but respectfully) that arming the world will decrease terrorism. All it will do is increase it among those who currently merely think of it.


What you state may be entirely true however, disarming societies(world) sure as hell is not an answer ever............... Not as long as human beings roam the earth.......


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

Cait43 said:


> What you state may be entirely true however, disarming societies(world) sure as hell is not an answer ever............... Not as long as human beings roam the earth.......


No argument there.


----------



## acepilot (Dec 16, 2012)

Cait43 said:


> Terrorists can strike any time, anywhere: Self defense saves lives | Fox News[/url]


Armed citizens can strike back any time, anywhere: Self defense saves lives.......


----------



## westy39 (Jun 29, 2014)

This is indeed a subject that brings forth a lot of emotion as well as fear. The targeting of so called soft targets is normal, terrorists as well as other criminals don't go after the subject that will fight back , they go after the easy victim. This is normal as criminals and even terrorists as they are basically lazy, why would any criminal or terrorist go against anyone or anything that has an even chance of fighting back?
Just sayin criminals and terrorists go after the soft unprotected targets first because it is easy. I spent 22 years as a street cop and I can say with some small authority that most if not all criminals don't go looking for a fair fight but an easy target for their assault. Be aware of your surroundings and the people there, as the Boy Scouts would say "be prepared". Be safe all. God Bless America.


----------



## Kynochco (Jan 9, 2015)

It's the fault of the bleeding heart liberals in the west, the fear fear. Look at what Europe has become, an enclave of Mecca, and shitria law is becoming the norm over there. Sweden, (not so) Great Britainistan, France (not surprising) and the rest of Muzzie lover Europe is soon to fall. Gun legislation, the nanny state mentality, as well as indoctrination by (liberal) governments both federal and municipal have set the agenda for hate and terror. I honestly think that America (maybe Canada) are the last bastion of freedom, America more so because of the 2nd Amendment. Once that goes if ever it does, then say goodbye to everything. Until then, brace for impact and don't be complacent otherwise it's lights out and if you don't think the unthinkable cannot happen, go back 14 years only one day before.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

Kynochco said:


> It's the fault of the bleeding heart liberals in the west... <snip jingoistic paranoia!>


On the other hand, if the chicken-hawk Right-wingers hadn't lied us into this war, then the Islamic jihadists woulds have had less to complain about. Just a thought....

Sorry, is my liberalism showing?


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

SailDesign said:


> On the other hand, if the chicken-hawk Right-wingers hadn't lied us into this war, then the Islamic jihadists woulds have had less to complain about. Just a thought....
> 
> Sorry, is my liberalism showing?


No, your selective memory is showing. Plenty of lefties are on record as saying (and I guess believing-who could know?) the same things, during the Clinton reign. Of course, they stopped believing it just in time to undermine the people who wanted to do something about it.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

Bisley said:


> No, your selective memory is showing. <snippage>


Curious... I'm trying to think of a left-winger who led us into a war in the last, oh - thirty years. Seems to me all of those who declared war overseas were named "Bush" recently. But I'm quite happy to see proof that I'm wrong to hear I'm wrong on that.


----------



## Kynochco (Jan 9, 2015)

It must be nice and cozy being an apologist


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

Kynochco said:


> It must be nice and cozy being an apologist


Oh, I'm not apologizing for the Bushes.... Far from it.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Two lefts don't make a right. :smt083

I think it takes three.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> Two lefts don't make a right. :smt083


No - but three lefts do.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

SailDesign said:


> No - but three lefts do.


You're just too quick on that damned keyboard of yours. :buttkick:


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> You're just too quick on that damned keyboard of yours. :buttkick:


If you would be so kind as to stop poking me in the butt.... 

BTW, Bisley - I found some old patches the other day - this one is my '72 Royal Navy Bisley one from the Ashburton Cup shoot.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> Two lefts don't make a right. :smt083
> 
> I think it takes three.


Hey! No fair editing coz you were too slow the first time.


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Two lefts make a U-turn........


----------

