Breaking news from Umpqua Community College in Oregon. Initial reports were 5 to 15 people dead, now it's 7 to 10 dead and 20 wounded, and the shooter may be down, or in custody, or both.

We'll no doubt be hearing more about this later.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Reports are now that 13 are dead, possibly including the shooter.

Onward and upward,
airforce

That's. Not far away from me.

Eh, never mind, that's the one down south ,not really my area.

http://www.wnd.com/2015/10/reports-15-killed-20-injured-in-shooting-rampage-in-oregon/

Something I find funny...

That arrogant negro who presumes to be president says this proves we need stricter gun control regulations.

Well duh...there was already a law that prevented anyone from carrying arms on campus. That really stopped the criminal didn't it.

This could've been stopped had a student or faculty member been armed, but no they wanted to be safe in a gun free zone. Worked out real well I'd say.

Bingo.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Appears to be part of the war on Christians as the shooter was asking people that were lined up if they were Christians...
Yes- shot to head.
No- shot in leg.

Press will avoid this.

Any idea of affiliation or self idealized nut job?

Roseburg is about as well armed of an area as you will see anywhere. In at area, regular guns hardly even count, it's a question of how large your NFA collection is. I am very surprised the perp did not have a run in with a person with a carry piece, legal or otherwise.

It has also been reported that the shooter was another raghead.

There's a solution for that problem.

Ugh, not good timing for diplomatic stuff up here in Portland.

I have been building a playground at an Islamic school and noticed what looks to me like a lot of gang stalking activity. People cruising by kind of skulking around but not getting confrontational. The guys working with me say "Christian nut jobs", figuring unaffiliated individuals. The people running the Muslim center are being really picky about which refugee families get brought in and taken care of but you never know if some cousin or nephew got dragged along while not really being with the peace and tolerance program. The diplomatic way they want to handle that is if someone wants to be jihadi about things, they get a plane ticket out of the country like Pronto.

The issue is that can't be done with the Black Americans so the black part of their congregation has the most undercover operatives working it and they all seem to have an idea who I am and keep a distance. Then there are some militant black Americans who make an arrival from time to time but the East Africans don't want to upset their gravy train of benefits so they shut down militant stuff as quick as they can.

What happens though is someone can spin off and self radicalize on their own, make contact with extremists on the net and the rest ends up in the news. The issue among them however is that unless they are really capable of acting lone wolf (easier said than done), the FBI will get close to them then manage to set them up, usually with a fake bomb.

Every last one of them needs to be removed by any means necessary.

I'm not sure if this is the same guy, but this could be Chris Harper Mercer\'s MySpace page . Check out his photo page .

Onward and upward,
airforce

Mixed race guy, like he could be Obama's nephew...

I am chocking that one up to nutball of the moment.

Armed Air Force Vet Was Prevented From Stopping Oregon Gunman

"The staff wouldn't let us go to assist"

by Paul Joseph Watson | October 2, 2015


An Air Force veteran who had a licensed concealed carry gun was prevented by staff from intervening in the shooting yesterday at the Umpqua Community College during which ten people were killed.

John Parker was situated in a building about 200 yards away from where the shooting began.

“There were a few people in the vet center and then when we heard the shooting happened, we got up and we were gonna go out and see what we could do,” Parker told Fox News’ Sean Hannity.

“Immediately the school staff stopped us and told us to get inside of the building….essentially the staff wouldn’t let us go to assist,” he added.

One courageous man who also tried to apprehend the shooter, Army veteran Chris Mintz, ended up being shot five times. Mintz was unarmed.

In asserting his right to concealed carry, Parker was knowingly violating a rule which declared the college to be a gun free zone.

As we reported yesterday, a post on the college website made it clear that even water pistols were banned on campus.

The single security officer working on the campus was also unarmed, according to the Associated Press.

Meanwhile, as news emerges that the gunman, 26-year-old Chris Harper Mercer, was a potential Islamist sympathizer who dabbled in the occult, expect the left to lose interest in the incident quickly.

The fact that Mercer is mixed race will also make it impossible for progressives to blame the shooting on all white people, as many did in the aftermath of the Dylann Roof shooting.

Mercer reportedly targeted Christians during the shooting, asking victims about their religion and shooting anyone who identified as a Christian in the head.

“[He started] asking people one by one what their religion was. ‘Are you a Christian?’ he would ask them, and if you’re a Christian stand up. And they would stand up and he said, ‘Good, because you’re a Christian, you are going to see God in just about one second.’ And then he shot and killed them,” Stacy Boylen, whose daughter was wounded at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Ore., told CNN.

Also see:
http://www.wnd.com/2015/10/reports-15-killed-20-injured-in-shooting-rampage-in-oregon/

Check out his Myspace connections page:

https://myspace.com/344765151/connections/out

He is connected with a Muslim who seems to be at least a little on the Radical side going by who he is connected with:

https://myspace.com/dick_hard_like_a_pistol/photos

They all appear to be Muslims and also Radical and also seem to be Perverted Homo.

All of the shooter\'s guns were legally obtained. So, just what law would have prevented this tragedy, other than banning guns entirely? President Obama sure didn't suggest any in his sophomoric rant.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Maybe a Law requiring Teachers and Administrators to always be Armed would have prevented this.

Whoops that is not the kind of Law Obama wants even thought it would have worked.

Gun Free Zones get People Killed.

Someone with Political Connections should contact Paul and Cruz and even Trump and explain to them all about Gun Free Zones and that if the Teachers were armed this sick person would have been stopped before he killed all those Students and maybe and use getting rid of Gun Free Zones aka (Helpless Victim Zones) as one way to prevent these Murders from happening.

airforce
I believe by some of your posts, you are not just a regular Libertarian Voter but you are Higher Up in the Libertarian Party and you actually Authored part of the Libertarian Party Platform, so maybe you know someone who can deliver this information to Paul, Cruz and even if you have to wash your fingers afterward Trump.

Lord Vader, I was on a Platform Committee once, and I vowed I would never do it again. Take a look at the platform on abortion, and you'll understand why. We were up until four in the morning arguing about it way too many times.

I would love for Paul or Cruz to make that point, but I'm not a part of their campaign staff. And, I'm a little uncomfortable politicizing tragedies like this. I know Democrats don't have any problem doing that, but I'm not a Democrat.

Onward and upward,
airforce

The thing is if or when Paul or Cruz are asked a question about that Tragedy it would be nice if they had an answer that included a partial solution to stopping School Shootings that is better then the usual Democrat one about More Gun Control

Something we can do is spread this article around. Every mass shooting in the U.S. since the 1950\'s occurred in "gun free zones."

I'm sure there will be a question or two about this in the upcoming debates. Hopefully Paul and Cruz will be armed with some facts, and be willing to state them.

Onward and upward,
airforce

We got confirmation, I had been given some indications that the guy was into the occult, Mark Dice got confirmation he was a Satanist in the tradition of Alister Crowley.

Mainstream keeps off of that, but they have a long history of shit like this. Then the occasional serial killer like Richard Ramirez who was schooled by an uncle or older brother (I forget which) who was in a Special Forces unit in Vietnam that did some sick shit to Vietnamese women they managed to get a hold of.

The Colorado shooters have also played out to be satanists. Not like its a new thing, but we concentrated on Jihadism so much that we lose sight of these other meth whack weirdos and their shit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B1nRFOLsLs

On rare occasions, something sensible comes out of Donald\'s mouth. I don't think it would have helped much in this case, because as I recall the professor was the first one shot. But the principle still stands, the more people with guns, the better.

Onward and upward,
airforce

airforce
But if more then one person had been Armed?

Brother I know Trump is not your favorite Candidate or I suppose Person but Trump is gaining in the way I feel about him becoming President.

I believe that even though Trump supports Eminent Domain he would make a Great President.

At this point in our History I believe that Trump is what is needed to maybe with a little luck start to turn our Republic around and back to what it used to and should be.

Brother I know how you feel about the Free Market and Open Borders so some of the things I like about Trump, you won't.

So what is Trump saying that is putting him closer to the top of my very short list.

Trump seems to really be Pro Second Amendment and I feel with him as President our 2nd Amendment rights will be as secure as they have been for a very long time.

And what he just stated about Gun Free Zones is Proof that he understands the truth about Gun Control Laws, and with him as President there is a good chance that he will get rid of Gun Free Zones.

And I believe it was last week he stated some of his ideas about the Economy and keeping American Jobs in the United States.

One of his ideas is to tax American Company's that move Jobs out of the United States and when the Media Person told Trump that he couldn't do that because of the NAFTA Treaty he basically said Screw the Treaty and stated he would Violate the Treaty since it was a Bad Treaty that should never been enacted.

And what Trump feels about NAFTA and Violating it is exactly the way I feel and what I would do if I were to be President.

And added to this is what Trump wants to do to solve the problem with Illegal Aliens and that he would kick out all of the Syrian Refugees that Obama will let move here and his ideas on Taxation, to me is Proof that Trump knows what he is doing.

We need a President who is a real American and is not a Politician and is very intelligent and that is exactly what Trump is.

Right now Trump is Number One and Cruz and Paul are a very close Number Two and Number Three.

I may change my placing of them after I know what Cruz and Paul have to say about this latest school shooting and what their thoughts are on saving American Jobs.

But right now I feel Trump is what we need to save our Country.

That is the fundamental disagreement you and I have. The government can't create jobs, or save jobs. They can sure lose jobs though, and it's been doing a damn good job of that.

I don't care for NAFTA either, but probably for different reasons than you or Trump. Either you believe in a free market and free trade, or you don't. As for the Second Amendment, I'll take Paul or Cruz over Trump any day. Not that it matters because, for me at least, his stance on eminent domain is an automatic disqualifier.

Not that I'm opinionated or anything, but...

Onward and upward,
airforce

Hillary Clinton Calls for Mass Movement to Eradicate Second Amendment

Will "never relent" in war on Bill of Rights


by Infowars.com | October 4, 2015

Presidential candidate and former First Lady and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is calling for a a “national movement” to “stand up to the NRA and the gun lobby,” euphemisms for attacking and rolling back the Second Amendment.

Clinton acknowledged passing laws designed to chip away at the constitutional right of Americans to own firearms will be “a political mountain to climb,” but said if elected she will “never relent.”

“But you don’t get anything done in this country if you don’t start by calling it out,” Clinton said.

She then exploited the child victims of “gun violence,” in other words the victims of psychopaths, many on psychotropic drugs.

“We need to make every politician who sides with them to look into the eyes of parents whose children have been murdered and explain why they listened to the gun lobbyists instead.”

She went on to characterize the effort to hamper and eventually eliminate the Second Amendment as “constitutional.”

“There are a lot of ways for us to have constitutional, legal gun restrictions. My husband did. He passed the Brady bill, and he eliminated assault weapons for 10 years. So we’re gonna take them on. We took them on in the ’90s. We’re gonna take them on again.”

Yes we do disagree on saving jobs.

As I see it the Government can Save Jobs by keeping American Companies from moving American Jobs to other Countries.

What Trump wants to do and what I would do if I could is just reverse what a Previous Administration did with the NAFTA Treaty.

As to eminent domain, I know you have more then one problem with Trump but if Trump would make the perfect President other then the one thing about Eminent Domain would that one issue still be an automatic disqualifier?

And knowing this there are still some Members of this board who are stupid enough to Vote Their Conscience even though by doing so Clinton may become President.

I have had it with stupid people willing to see our Nation Destroyed just to Vote for their Third Party, they put their Party before their Country and that really sucks.

I really wish I had won the big lottery then I would be able to abandon ship and move to New Zealand.

I have had it with Stupid People and Stupid Voters.

Unless Patriots can get their act together and even if not on the same Paragraph we should all be at least on the Same Book.

Some times I have a feeling some of the members of this Board are not even in the Same Library as other Members for example ME.

It sucks but at this time if we want to save our Constitutional Rights and our Nation from scum like Clinton we have to Vote Republican even if it means washing our hands in Acid afterward.

Vader, a couple of things here. First, many of us are tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. Secondly, you think this hasn't already been decided? Please.

This is a rigged corrupt game, and we the people are the ones who lose the most. If that makes me a stupid person. Put me in the moron category please.

What Patriots need to do is let the Bitch and other Gun Haters know, in no uncertain terms that if they want a WAR that is exactly what they will get.

We must let them know that we will never let them take away our gun rights and we will fight and use every means at our disposal to defend our rights and we Mean Every Means.

We must also explain to the Bitch and the other Liberal Scum that Gun Control and the Attempt to Confiscate 18th Century Assault Rifles aka (Brown Bess Muskets) and Cannons from the Concord Massachusetts Militia was the Trigger Event that Ignited the First American Revolution and any attempt at taking our guns will be met the same way with Gun Shots and the Beginning of the Second American Revolution.

And it must not just be rhetoric, it must be backed up with action and the first Action should be Armed Demonstrations in every State and in Every City of Every State.

I opted out of the last two Presidential Elections since there was no way I would vote for Obama and I also didn't want to vote for the Republican Candidates. So we ended up with Obama and Obamacare and his Amnesty for Illegals etc etc.

Lets see the results of the Election has already been decided so why bother to post anything about the Election on this board.

So since the Hillary Bitch or another of the Liberal Scum is going to be our next President why wait for them to attack us, what we should do is load our rifles and go on the Offensive right now a nice little preempted attack on the enemy and we can catch them off guard.

Now if I really though that way I would deserve to be locked up in a Mental Hospital.

The difference between us is that you seem to have given up and surrendered and I still have a little hope left and I am willing to give the Political Process one more chance before I take up arms to fight the next American Revolution.

Also there is nothing to be gained by voting your conscience except that warm feeling that you have given the finger to the system.

So if the Hillary Bitch wins and she does go to war against the 2nd Amendment are you going to pick up your rifle and Fight or are you going to find some excuse to sit on your ass and do nothing?

Oh I don't expect you to answer that, it is just something for you to think about.

If a candidate flat out says he has nothing wrong with stealing from the poor and giving it to the rich, I can't imagine that he would be any good, let alone "perfect."

If Jesus returned and said he favored eminent domain, I would respectfully suggest that He go back and review some of His Father's commandments. Particularly that one about "Thou shalt not steal," but the "Bearing false witness" bit usually comes into play as well.

One of the things I'm most proud of in my life was helping to stop the City of Tulsa from seizing more than a dozen homes so a developer could build a strip mall. One of those homes belonged to a 90 year old blind lady, whose home was paid for by her husbands government life insurance policy after he was killed on Okinawa.

Our little local libertarian group pounded the sidewalks, talking to the NAACP (it's no accident that these thefts usually occur in black neighborhoods) and other assorted activists. By the time the vote was finally held, the city council defeated the measure, 9-0.

That old blind lady has been dead for nearly 20 years now. But she died in her own home. And yes, I'm proud of that.

Onward and upward,
airforce

I am also against Eminent Domain but my point was no one is Perfect.

So if you had to chose between a Candidate who wanted to get rid of the Second Amendment but was totally against Eminent Domain or a Candidate who was totally for the Second Amendment but approved of Eminent Domain who would you chose between.

To me it is all a matter of Priorities and what is more important, in this example the Second Amendment or Eminent Domain.

I have a feeling that you would willing sacrifice the Right to Keep and Bear Arms just to get rid of Eminent Domain and that in my opinion is wrong.

Which is more important, the First Amendment or the Second? The late Charlton Heston was once asked that question, and his answer, "They are both first among equals," was about as good an answer as you can get. What good is the Second Amendment, if the government can come and steal your property anyway? And what good is your property, if you don't have the means to defend it? Gun rights and property rights are equal. If fact, you can't really have one without the other.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Eminent Domain is like the death penalty, something for extreme cases. There are plenty of circumstances where I find it entirely justified to sneak up and put a bullet in the back of someone's head, but that does not mean I would bring a government process into approving it unless I was pretty darn sure it was justified. Even on personal initiative, if I were to stand judgement for it, I want to be able to explain why it needed to go down that way.

On Eminent Domain, there is a point of absurdity where we can look at issues like "property ownership" and "public good" and have to make some fairly easy choices. If some stubborn person is holding up a major freeway interchange, then the traditional legal thing to do has been to take over the land, evict them, and pay a sum equal to what is the average purchase price of similar properties, minus realistic court and legal costs. There just has to be a point where some stubborn grandstander is not going to be getting in the way of progress, especially in cities where they know damn well the decision to live there has everything to do with proximity to services and that constantly upgraded infrastructure.

I also would take a point with some issues on the Bundy Ranch. Measuring very specific issues of domestic productivity vs what Harry Reid was going to use the land for. I personally saw Bundy and the other ranchers as having used the land productively, and that all of those ranchers could have easily gone another 25-50 years as the status quo. What was happening in that circumstance is that Harry Reid's real estate interests wanted to get in the game early on land grants and subdivisions to create "value" where there was none. Nevada can't handle Harry Reid's brand of development because it lacks water, so it's not like anyone was getting fooled on that one. We are also talking about the kind of development which is horribly outdated, as urban sprawl development in Nevada has generally been. That's part of why I view Eminent Domain as something that is to be looked at on a case by case basis.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Breacher

I am in agreement with you on this issue.

Eminent Domain is something that is sometimes necessary but has been used way too frequently and for the wrong reasons.

And as for
Interesting question.

I have one, what does the First Amendment have to do with Property Rights?

I always thought that the First Amendment had to do with the Freedom of Speech, of the Press and of Religion.

Life is a matter of Priorities somethings are more important then others.

Take me I hope to be living in Arizona sometime next year and one of the first things I am doing is getting a horse.

What I am looking for in a horse is in order of importance:

Personality
Size
Training
Breed
Sex
Color

If the horse has the Personality, Size and Training I am looking for, I am not going to pass on the horse just because the Breed, Sex or Color is not what I prefer.

It is the same for choosing a President.

Some things are more important then other things and as I see it Eminent Domain is not in the Top three or four things.

What is important to me is:

Second Amendment

Freedom of Religion and the Practice Thereof

Abortion and Saving Babies

Keeping Illegals from becoming Citizens and getting rid of them

Keeping Terrorists from being brought into the United States

Getting Rid of Obamacare

Bringing back the Jobs that were moved out of the United States because of NAFTA

And if the Next President is against Eminent Domain then so much the better.

We need to remember that Eminent Domain is not the only way that the Government steals property from people and Big Businesses also steal Property without using Eminent Domain and yet you airforce wants to remove all laws that help to keep Businesses from hurting People.

Interesting, for you Eminent Domain is BAD but a Business stealing a persons property because some Seeds blew onto a Farmer's land, well it is a different thing.

Priorities, Priorities we all have our Priorities personally I believe that my Priorities for deciding who to vote for are more important then Eminent Domain being King.

Yes, I am in favor of removing all laws regulating business, because they are superfluous. There are civil remedies for businesses that negligently harm someone. And these civil remedies have the effect of deterring reckless practices. (Criminal laws still apply for intentional acts.)

As an example of how this works, suppose a company accidentally (or even intentionally) dumps 100 tons of chicken poop into a river. Well, that is a trespass against every property owner downstream, and each property owner is entitled to sue for damages. That can get pretty expensive for a company pretty quickly.

So who will oversee the company, to lessen the likelihood of such a spill? The company will, and so will the company's insurance provider. If the insurance provider will be potentially on the hood for millions of dollars, you can bet they will take a look at what the company is doing to prevent these spills.

In short, the free market will regulate itself.

And far better than the government is doing. As an example of this point, OSHA has been in existence for about forty years now. They've performed countless inspections, written countless rules and regulations, and issued hundreds of millions of dollars in fines. How many workplace injuries have they prevented? If you believe the government's own statistics, the answer to that question is...wait for it...

ZERO.

Yep. A worker is just as likely to be injured on the job today as he was forty years ago.

Get government out of business, and let businesses and the civil courts regulate themselves.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Since I don't want this topic to go any further off topic I have started a new Topic on this Issue and a few other issues I have with your viewpoint of the Fee Market.

http://www.awrm.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=22&t=001523

The 2nd is what makes the 1st possible...

Brother you are 100% Correct.

Without the 2nd the Government could take away all our other Rights and steal all the Property and there would not be anything that could be done about it.

Eminent Domain is bad but not nearly as bad as losing our Second Amendment Rights.

Some People have really Screwed Up Priorities.