Star Trek Stars Grieve For The Victims Of The Orlando Shooting *UPDATED*

| June 12, 2016 | By: Laurie Ulster 124 comments so far

We grieve for the victims of the horrific violence in Orlando last night. Star Trek’s two biggest philosophies are “Infinite diversity in infinite combinations” and “Live long and prosper,” and violence like this could not contradict them more.

Below are messages from those who have contributed to Star Trek, as they tweet their condolences, emotions, and anger about the biggest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.

[UPDATE 6/13] More Trek stars join the chorus.

GATES MCFADDEN

WILLIAM SHATNER

JOHN CHO

BRYAN FULLER

MICHAEL DORN

MICHAEL OKUDA

WIL WHEATON

GEORGE TAKEI

IDRIS ELBA

EXCHANGE BETWEEN WIL WHEATON AND MARINIA SIRTIS

RENE AUBERJONOIS

LEVAR BURTON

And

JONATHAN FRAKES

TERRY FARRELL

GEORGE TAKEI

[UPDATE 6/13 – More Trek stars join the chorus]

SIMON PEGG

ARON EISENBERG

ZACHARY QUINTO

SHARE TWEET PIN SHARE

Related Articles

124 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

“Islamaphobic” lol

Being islamophobic to me means you don’t agree with anti-semitism, you don’t agree with hatred towards people of different sexualities, you believe in gender equality and are disgusted by the way women are treated in islam society, you are against totalitarian religions, and you are generally against intolerance towards people who are different from you. That makes me a proud islamophobe.
I live in Belgium, believe me, I know what I am talking about.

It was an Islamic ISIS Member who carried out the Attack. That has been confirmed. Heck. The F.B.I even knew about him for the past few years. This is Truly a Sad day for all Amrican’s

No, it wasn’t. That was misinformation. It’s now known that he was actually a gay man who was a regular at the club, and who was angry that his father would never accept his orientation. He called in a nonexistent ISIS connection to 9-1-1 in order to obscure the truth.

Except it makes no sense that he would attack the gay club out of anger at his father. It was either the standard Islamic murder rampage, or if anything else, was some sort of revenge attack for rejection or humiliation by fellow gays.

I really wish Wil Wheaton would wait a week before getting political. That can wait until we go through the stages of grief…

Exactly.

Regards.

When exactly IS the right time, hmm?

Maybe you can mansplain it to this mother who’s waiting outside a hospital in Orlando to find out whether her son is dead.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/mother-man-missing-orlando-club-shooting-breaks-awaits/story?id=39794076

Really. The damn act itself was political.

How about you cool your jets? I have NO problem debating the gun control debate, but I’m not about to do so right now. It’s called “decorum”. Use some.

This is what always happens. People decide that it is innapporpriate to discuss gun control immediately following a mass shooting for reasons of “decorum”. By the time people decide it is okay to talk about it, everyone’s already forgotten about the most recent tragedy, and nobody cares again until the next mass shooting. While people are still fedling the pain that weak gun laws have caused is exactly the right time to discuss the issue. Otherwise, it will keep happenning again and again.

So under your logic it wasn’t the ideology of the ISLAMIC TERRORIST that prompted the attack but instead it was weak laws. REALLY?

He wasn’t an Islamic terrorist. That was misinformation. It’s now known that he was actually a self-hating gay man without terrorist connections, who was a regular at the club and was angry that his father would never accept his orientation. He called in a nonexistent ISIS connection to 9-1-1 in order to obscure the truth.

Can you please link me to a viable source stating that we “know” that he was actually a self-healing gay man? Just because he frequented the club and used gay dating apps doesn’t automatically make him gay. In fact, ISIS and Al Qaeda (as well as other similar factions) currently use dating sites to lure gay men and women out solely for the purpose of murdering them. How do we know he wasn’t simply attempting to infiltrate this community in order to gain access and obtain reconnaissance for his scheme? His statements of support or allegiance to various groups who are in conflict with each other may simply indicate that he wanted to be martyred and famous, but until there is factual and not circumstantial evidence proving his sexual orientation, it is unwise to make these claims. Unless, of course, I missed something from the FBI’s updates regarding this attack. In the end, we can all agree at least that, regardless of the motive, people are dead and this is wrong and unfair. Devastating to all people who espouse Roddenberry’s IDIC philosophy. Anyone with a caring heart at all, really.

Self-hating.*

Enough with the virtue signalling about gun laws. In the known history of humanity, no gun ever jumped down off the wall and killed someone. No weapon ever harmed anyone unless someone made the choice to use it. OUAT to the contrary, evil isn’t born or made, it’s chosen. But as usual, we’re blaming everyone and everything except the man who pulled the trigger.

“mansplain”? Good lord.

One tear from that woman would go a lot farther, than her whole ban autos speech at the end. Please.

You folks make me ashamed to be a Star Trek fan.

You missed the target on this one, Wil. A large majority of Police are killed by criminals with records. I think that would be the best place to start to limit possession of handguns.

Wait? There are already laws for that!? Hmmm?

Once the government is disarms, perhaps we will put down our weapons.

I had a couple of thoughts after reading this.

First, why the focus on the gay issue? A human life lost is a tragedy and should have nothing to do with their orientation. To do so, just plays into the terrorist’s agenda..

Secondly, I have never heard of any of these stars expressing any outrage or remorse over the 3,587 coalition soldiers who have died fighting terrorists since 9/11. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Hollywood is quick to honor celebrities and sports figures as heroes, but not those who actually put their lives on the line.

With that said, my thoughts and prayers go out to the survivors and the families of the victims.

Regards.

I neglected to include the 4,822 coalition service members killed in Iraq. I never deployed to Afghanistan before I retired last year, but I did twice to Iraq and once to Bosnia. Unless I missed it, none of the stars above voiced outrage or remorse over service members who died.

Regarding Wil Wheaton – perhaps he should direct that comment to ISIS – the one’s who are actually responsible.

Regards.

Perhaps because those people CHOSE to serve and therefore accepted the possibility of such consequences, as opposed these civilians just being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

So you shouldn’t feel bad for people who put their life on the line to protect the very people who were just murdered just because they volunteered? They should be mourned just as much if not more because of the actions.

that might only be true if the party in question respects the cause for the fighting; if the soldier is seen as being a tool (unwitting or not), that has the potential to undercut the humane response to his/her injury, since the soldier could be seen as furthering the pain of others just by being over there.

Or take it from another perspective: to put it in SciFi terms, do you feel more sorry for everybody down on earth who gets bombed to death in STARSHIP TROOPERS or ENTERPRISE, or the soldiers on those show who die in defense of Earth? At least with the latter, they chose that fate, the civilians just wake up dead. I mourn the latter.

I’m sure I can come up with other variations on this to justify why the death of the wholly innocent can be seen as more ‘mournable’ than that of those serving, but don’t imagine such examples are going to impress you in this instance.

Hollywood and the media should never push agendas. No group should be targeted for any stupid violence such as this. Neither should anyone be ridiculed and labeled for their feelings of a particular lifestyle.

Unfortunately, it’s what the left has become. If you don’t agree with them you’re labeled a bigot or a racist.

Funny, most would say it is the right with this kind of extremism (y’know, Republican equals NRA.) Of course that might have to do with voting the party line without considering issues and how they affect people, only how they affect dollars, but voting party line without thinking an issue through is maybe the most irresponsible act a citizen can make outside of not endorsing the creation of organ banks to use up any repeat felons. (how’s that for a lib/rad wiling to consider reason? I’ve always been pro death penalty, just wish they’d get the spare parts program going to make the most of it.)

Very well stated.

really wishing people wouldn’t be using this incident to promote their views on the gun issue. in response to some of wil weatons comments: on the one hand no, i don’t want a criminal owning a gun. on the other hand, if someone decides to break into my grandmas house in the middle of the night she should have the right to defend herself with lethal force. there is no perfect solution that solves both of those sides, so don’t use this tragedy to try to promote your own agenda

Exactly !

If they don’t, this will just happen again.

There are much tougher gun control laws in Paris and look what happened there. Twice. The reason why this will happen again is because we have a president who isn’t tough enough and serious enough on combatting the root of this problem: ISIS.

It happenned twice in Paris. It happens every few weeks in America.

Thanks for removing my post. There was no profanity . Nice to know this site isn’t bias.

The term is “biased,” not “bias.”

And this site is not.

There was a bit of snark in your response. Kind of makes me sad about how this site is being run.

Yes it is. My post disappeared too. Mine had profantiy, but it was the same quote the idiot Wil Wheaton made. I guess only superstars can use profanity. No bias, my foot.

Couldn’t have said it better.

It is partly the fault or the NRA, who have kept the pressure on law makers to keep ownership of AR-15s legal. Partly it is religion, for constantly scapegoating LGBT people, and constantly pressuring lawmakers to pass anti-LGBT legislation. It’s partly the fault of those lawmakers. It’s also partly the FBI’s fault, for spending more time with entrapment than investigation of actually dangerous people who are already on their radar, like this shooter. And mostly it’s the fault of the shooter.
Don’t pretend that the NRA are blameless here. It’s so far beyond the pale of what you’d expect of a Star Trek fan, and 2 of 3 of the first comments on this article, I’m pretty certain that we have been trolled by the NRA or their friends, here.

Hmmm…. what hateful, misogynist, imperialist death-cult is missing from your assignment of blame?

I think you are lumping religions together. Not all religions feel the same about LGBT people. By doing so, you are doing a bit of “religious profiling”.

Since we don’t yet know how the radical Islamist terrorist acquired his weapon, it’s perhaps too soon to start blaming the NRA. There was a story last week about someone in a truck plowed through a bunch of cyclists and killed 5 instantly. I didn’t hear of Wil Wheaton saying “F Ford!”.

You are absolutely correct in saying “It’s the fault of the shooter”.

Regards.

As a gay man, I reserve the right to blame religion for the hatred lumped upon gays. Maybe there’s a religion or two that don’t persecute us, but the entirety of persecution against gays is because of religion. And the shooter had a permit to own an AR-15. An AR -15, which has been foiled in repeated attempts to ban by the NRA.

I can definitely see that POV.

Do you honestly believe a criminal won’t get himself an “illegal” gun? That’s what criminals do, isn’t it?

No need to make ir easier for them though.

^I rest my case.^ I’m not feeding the trolls any longer.

Nope. He’s not a troll. He made some very valid points. Sorry.

How am I a troll? Because I will not further rhetoric that brings more hate? Or that I think that tragedy does not have to mean more violence? I am tired of hearing of hate speech and desires for retributions. I want a better future. Is that trolling?

Please point out anywhere I was being hateful. Your lack of regard for civil discussion is much closer to hate in my opinion.

Fancy hearing the Oath of Allegiance to the Queen of Canada? Watch this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykIFQsDaou8

The victims aren’t the issue. This time it was gays. Last time marathon runners. Before that magazine editors, soldiers, office workers…. this isn’t about gay rights or guns. It’s about an imperialist hateful ideological cancer masquerading as a religion. The victims and weapons of the moment will keep changing. The cry of “death to the infidels” never will!

This was an attack on ALL Americans. Wave the American flag of inclusion, not the rainbow flag of special interests!

Nice.

Conveniently forgetting massacres committed by Americans who are not Muslims. This has to be NRA trolling.

Nope. Nice try, though.

The Hell does that have to do with what happened in Orlando?!

The terrorist nonsense was this nutjobs excuse, but it is a bigger problem then just religous extremism. We have mass shootings all the time in America, and most of the time it isn’t terrorists. We need to make it harder for people like this to get guns.

I don’t know why I bother to post sometimes. Everything winds up in “moderation purgatory” …

Regards.

It’s obviously some type of filter going on … any posts mentioning Will Wheaton automatically go to moderation … :)

Regards.

I noticed that too! Star Trek has always been about sharing different ideas and opinions.

Will Wheaton — that is way too soon dude to be making your political points (which I agree with, but the time is not right).

When is the time right? When nobody cares any more?

The point I was trying to make, in the post where I quoted Wil Wheaton’s profanity and was deleted, is “how are you going to get rid of the guns if you ban them?” We banned liquor during Prohibition. It didn’t work but instead created crime syndicates that are still with us today, nearly a century later. We have banned most narcotics in the “War on Drugs”. They are today more prevalent than ever. So how are you going to get rid of guns? The easiest to get rid of will be the law-abiding gun owners. But those are generally not the problem. If people don’t willingly turn in their guns, are you prepared to kick down the door of every house, business and apartment in America to (try to) get them?

For actors who twitter “I’ve got this all figured out” — how about NEVER

Now is exactly the time to talk about reckless ideologies, and why the shills that are the NRA control the conversation about guns.

here is my thing with guns: lets say a big strong man wants to “assault”(not sure if the “r” word is allowed) a small woman. physically, she doesn’t stand a chance. a gun is pretty much the only thing that evens the playing field. so if someone can suggest a law that allows that woman to have the gun she needs to defend herself, but also keeps it out of the hands of people who shouldn’t have it, i’m all for it. but the problem with laws is that criminals dont mind breaking them. people buy drugs illegally all the time, and if someone wants a gun to commit a crime they will get one outside of the law.

an AR-15 isn’t going to fit in her purse.

what does her purse have to do with it? maybe the guy is trying to break into her HOUSE. why shouldn’t she have the best possible weapon to defend herself? thus, the conflict. the same weapon that is used to defend one person is used to hurt another. the same law that keeps one person from getting the gun stops someone who needs it to defend themselves from having it. if you have a solution, share it. but the life if the person who uses a gun to defend themselves isn’t worth less than the life of the person who gets murdered. they are both equal.

Ditto what WIL said.

very sad news indeed!

A terrorism issue – not a guns issue

This is a Star Trek site. And we have all of these commenters here saying “screw the opinions of all of these people who ARE Star Trek… It’s all about KILLING THE TERRORISTS and MORE GUNS ARE THE ANSWER. I really have a hard time believing this picture.

Actors are dancing bears. They’re good at what they do, but 99% of them should stick to that and otherwise STFU.

Totally agree. They have no real world experience that makes them any more enlightened than everyone else.

It’s actually both a terrorism issue AND a gun issue. If a terrorist got a hold of a nuclear weapon, would it ever be a nuclear proliferation issue? By your reasoning, it would remain solely a terrorism issue regardless of the means to kill.

I personally believe that all mass shootings in public spaces, regardless of the shooter’s affiliation, are acts of terrorism in some sense. Would I be happier if the perpetrators of these acts used knives instead of guns? Yes, but I’m not naive. I find it somewhat disingenuous when someone uses a self-defense argument for justifying the mass acquisition of an AR-15, a semi-automatic weapon which can shoot upwards of 800 rounds per minute.

Because nothing can be more than one kind of issue.

Question to ACpilot; If the terrorist utilized a nuclear weapon to carry out his attack, would it still solely be a terrorism issue and not both a terrorism/nuclear proliferation issue?

Last time I checked, the Paris attack killed 130 people in a country with some of the most restrictive gun laws in the world. The Boston Marathon bombings involved pressure cookers and nails to kill and injure. Like I said – it’s a terrorist issue, not a guns issue.

I noticed when someone doesn’t agree with your viewpoint you immediately label them as “trolls”. You of all people know the harm in labeling people in broad strokes.

How do you explain all of this pro-NRA, anti-islamic, anti-gay rhetoric all over this comment section? Is that a trekkie community? It is a fact that the NRA troll the web after mass shootings. It looks like that is what is going on here to me. It started out berating the opinions of star trek actors, and I have been attacked as the only person defending their progressive view points. Trekkies have always been a progressive lot, and these commenters certainly don’t fit that mold. 2+2=troll.

My sincerest sympathies and condolences to the family and friends of the victims of this senseless tragedy.

Well, this escalated quickly….

What a crazy planet this is, full of violence and intolerance. It’s far away from Roddenberry’s vision. It’s sad, really.

This makes me sick! The loss of life is horrific and it is awful the way people are already politicizing it and trying to make it a “gay issue!.” Correct me if I am wrong, but I didn’t see TrekMovie running a story like this when Paris was attacked or when killers wrought terrible havoc in the Brussels terror attack that badly injured and killed many including 3 young missionaries of my church, only boys really! How bout the story you ran after the San Bernardino massacre?!? Oh wait, there wasn’t one.

Nothing against gay people at all… but the loss of life in all these attacks has drawn comments from celebrities, not just this one. The reason being that any attack like this, be it on gay or straight people is hideous and deserves condemnation. Not just one that happened at a gay bar.

No offense trekmovie.com but you look terribly biased right now and terribly “issue orientated.” This comes off as being terribly shallow considering your history of not reporting on other atrocities. Maybe just stick to reporting news about the series and movies like you have always been good at.

I don’t get all the offense here. This was the biggest mass shooting in modern U.S. history. Posts about guns and the NRA are political; posts about the fact that this was, indeed, a murder spree that specifically targeted a gay club are not. People are expressing their grief and sorrow at the loss of life, and their solidarity with a group that was targeted. It’s called compassion. It’s not “taking a side” unless the side is that people shouldn’t be prejudiced. The Star Trek philosophy supports that ideal. If someone targeted any specific group of people, we would want to show solidarity, especially (now I’ll get political) when individual states are passing laws that ALLOW for discrimination. Now THAT’S an agenda. If you love Star Trek and what it stands for, you’ll get it. Fifty people were killed in one night, because of who they are.

The muslim has no place in a western civilization.

Really?!!

How does a view like this appear on a Star Trek forum? Remember “infinite diversity in infinite combinations”!

Must be a troll!

Um Mr Wheaton, the NRA had nothing to do with this incident and Republicans have not passed or proposed or written any “anti-LGTB” bills or laws.

Wow, this guy has become a raving far left lunatic.

Its thanks to the NRA that gun laws are weak enough to allow a man who has been investigated by the FBI to be able to legally buy a gun.

If someone who has been investigated by the FBI shouldn’t be able to buy a gun, how about access to the nuclear codes? Or becoming Commander-in-Chief of the world’s most powerful military? Any problem there?

Are there any other Constitutional rights you think the government should be able to take away from you without due process or recourse?

I guess Hillary Clinton cannot own guns then.

‘…and Republicans have not passed or proposed or written any “anti-LGTB” bills or laws.’

Um, yes they have.
The stupid ‘Bathroom Bills’ of late are just the latest round if vilifying LGBT people for going about their daily, and quite normal, lives.
There were anti ‘being gay’ laws, anti marriage-equality laws, anti consensual sex laws, that have been struck down. There still are housing and employment discrimination, and so many bullshit RFRA laws on the books all over this country.
Conservatives and Republicans are quite busy writing all kinds of LGBT- (and garden variety sex-) discrimination into law.

Fact is, there are a lot less gun shooting victims in countries where you can not just buy guns in a store. The US has the highest ratings of gun victims in the western world. The NRA and politicians are responsible for that. Glad I don’t live there.

Nope. The people who committed an illegal act are responsible.

There’s plenty of blame to go around.

In that case, you can abolish all rules. That state should protect its citizens and therefor not allow weapons to be sold in store to anyone who wants them. I’m glad I live in The Netherlands where dying of a gunshot is way less probable than in the States.

Japan has very strict gun laws and they have approximately 2 gun-related deaths per year. They also have one of the lowest murder rates in the world, despite being home to one of the most widely feared organized crime syndicates around, the Yakuza. And guess where the majority of firearms seized from Yakuza in Japan come from? The United States. Meanwhile, we’re now at 1000+ mass shootings in the US since Sandy Hook in 2012. Is there maybe, possibly, a connection between these things and the prolific gun ownership numbers in the US? We seem to dislike this question, but at some point we’re going to have to realistically address it.

Substantiate your claim that the US has the highest ratings of gun victims in the western world.

The OP is incorrect on that point. The US is at about #12 in firearm-related deaths and at about #20 for firearm-related homicides. Not the absolute worst, but almost every country with higher firearm-related deaths is dealing with extreme government corruption or drug cartel wars (Guatemala, Venezuela, Brazil, etc.). Not exactly a bragging point for us.

This isn’t a gay issue, it’s an American issue. These were our countrymen who were murdered by a man who had been on the FBI radar TWICE. This is entirely the fault of an administration that goes out of its way to accommodate Islam. The Justice Dept dropped the ball here.

I am gay. This massacre saddens me. I am not against Islam. I am against hate, fear, and violence. I feel we as a civilization are at a crux in our growth. We have two paths to choose – give in to fear and hate and have more violence, or just take a step back and look at the world from fresh eyes and hopefully embrace peace.

Well said.

Islamophobia? Jesus.

So. An Islamic mad man slaughters innocents and it’s the NRAS fault? Is the NRA in Belgium? or France? No? So what’s it git to do with Orlando?

Interesting that Takei, the only one of these people to have seen actual deprivation in his life (I mean, let’s be honest here, Wil Wheaton has been living in make-pretend world since he was a little kid, and many of the others aren’t far behind) and the one probably most personally affected (due to his sexual orientation, I mean, and racial matters as well) has the classiest, least finger-pointing post of all. Maybe it’s an age thing- the others of his generation (Shatner, Auberjonois) are pretty OK too. Once you start getting into Boomer territory and beyond…disgusting.

i am sedan and sicken by those events,we should all be able to choice our life style choicer without the fear of this happening,my heart goes out there to all the victims,friends and family

Im a station wagon.

The NRA had nothing to do with this. It’s sad to see people blaming guns instead of the individual.

I find it even more disappointing that I as a firearms owner share the same problem that muslims do, defending against the blame game.

Muslims didn’t commit this crime any more than gun owners did. A lunatic that was radicalized did.

All it would have taken is one person who took firearms training seriously, who was carrying and this terrible crime would have ended differently.

Let’s have a honest conversation: Prohibition doesn’t work, some humans are flawed, therefore the sane humans need to be able to defend themselves.

Fourty Nine people lost their lives because of prohibition and radicalization.

Navy is 100% correct on all of his/her points.

Law abiding citizens should be allowed to defend themselves.

How are those – who immediately blame the NRA for something it and its members did not do – any different than those who immediately accuse all Muslims of terrorism anytime something like this happens?

In the same way that the 2nd amendment was important to those in the Civil Rights movement who had to deal with domestic terrorists like the KKK, the 2nd amendment is important for any law abiding citizen who wants to protect themselves and their families in situations like this nightmare.

The following is a quote from a gay man who had to carry a gun for self defense: “It’s time to fight back. No more gun-free designated massacre zones. If there had been armed people with concealed carry permits inside the Pulse nightclub, the zealot who had pledged allegiance to ISIS could have been stopped. Dozens of lives could have been saved. I say that as a gay man who has himself carried a weapon for protection. Let’s get one thing very clear. Gun control advocates disarmed the victims at that night club. Florida law states unequivocally that even a concealed carry permit “does not authorize any person to openly carry a handgun or carry a concealed weapon or firearm into any portion of an establishment licensed to dispense alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises, which portion of the establishment is primarily devoted to such purpose.” That made those people sitting ducks. Legally designated gun-free zones are invitations to killers. They get to rack up kills among defenseless victims without any effective opposition. There is a reason that they seek out such places: Everyone has been disarmed and rendered defenseless by the gun-control movement. Advocates of gun control think it’s a good idea to disarm victims and to advertise where you can find completely defenseless people because there’s one primitive magical superstition they share with the murderer Omar Mateen: chanting things makes them true.” – Tom G. Palmer

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/tom-g-palmer-wake-orlando-gays-arm-article-1.2671568?cid=bitly

Citizens can decide if they want to carry firearms, and the owners of an establishment should be allowed to decide whether or not their patrons can come in with firearms but it should not be illegal for law abiding citizens to protect themselves.

There was an armed off-duty cop working security outside the club. He and the terrorist exchanged gunfire at the beginning of the rampage. It didn’t help.

The “good guy with a gun” argument is a joke.

Good Guys with guns won world war 2.

Often times security guards and for that matter police officers don’t get the ammunition or the time to spend training to use their firearms. It’s a job, they become complacent in it. I can’t say that I know how I would react, or how anyone else would react. The only thing that I do know for sure, is that I would like the ability to choose to try to defend myself rather than be hopelessly slaughtered.

I have no desire to ever be placed into a situation that demonstrates how evil some humans can be. I was raised not to be helpless. When a person puts their faith in the intelligence services, the police forces and hands over their self determination to the state they may very well be left in a helpless situation facing their mortality.

I find it confusing how all the evidence is in front of us, that no amount of prohibition works, that we cannot and really should not control human free will. If you accept that free will, and the choice to behave in a civilized manner is part of being a human in modern times, then you must accept that some people will refuse to behave in a civilized manner and there is only one single thing those people understand. Equal force.

I’m all for gun control but also believe most people should have the right to apply for gun ownership. Looking at the facts as we know them today is frustrating – if this guy was already working as a security guard, I am forced to wonder what laws that exist could have prevented this incident.

I suspect the gunman also knew a lot about how to navigate through the systems of observation which might have caught him preparing to commit this act. The FBI investigated his offhand comments and his dad seems like trouble, and if that didn’t set off an alarm, what would?

So I humbly suggest weface the environment that we are in as adults. We should be told by politicians that our environment is unpredictable – this is what it is like to be in a war in a foreign country. We are all Sorry it’s kind of here now, but it is.

Trying to say it will never happen again encourages people with a certain psychological disposition to keep trying to commit these acts, against almost insurmountable odds, regardless of ideology. They want to show the world something. And it encourages us to whine about it as if it was never going to happen again.

But if our politicians were admitting it’s going to happen again, would that help?

In conflict zones, the guns find people who want kill each other over sectarianism and fear. These guns have clans, regions, power. But some of the fighters are fake and resented. So most rebel movements fail. And the ideological wars just drag on and on. We see these wars almost petering out then starting again.

In The US, guns will kill a lot of people and the gunmen (mostly men) are going to be the statistical anomalies living among us. The gunmen know good guys don’t always win so they keep thinking they’ll go pro.

Unfortunately everybody already knows the lesson these gunmen are trying to ” teach.” In those last moments, we wonder, is the gunman really proud of himself or does he have waves of remorse filling his tiny brain?

It only matters how we as humans respond to this situation..

This whole situation starts from fear. The terrorist had to have believed that eventually, even if he kept this plan to himself, he would reveal something that would definitively identify him as a (potential) terrorist. So he acted. Donald Trump is insecure and trying to breed security insecurity, which will ironically breed more terrorism because everyone wants to go pro. But I also think it’s hard to prove that! Why is it hard to prove? Because the most difficult question of this whole incident is: why didn’t this guy say he happily acted on his own? Why did he feel like needed to say he was part of a terrorist group!?

Because it’s not the guns, it’s not the specific ideology, but it’s the psychology of self hatred — and that is not easy to pin down.

.

America’s gun laws were too relaxed from the start. America left the British Empire as a sovereign independent state. It must join the Commonwealth of Nations as a sovereign independent state on 01/07/2027. I can imagine seeing America choosing a form of government very similar to what Canada has, albeit with a non-monarchical Oath of Allegiance and Oath of Office.

Gun control is what kicked off the American Revolution.

Many of the comments here are unbecoming of the Star Trek community and I’m guessing largely coming from American commenters. Such ignorance.

Speak for yourself. Don’t assume that a difference of opinions is speaking from “ignorance”.

Wil Wheaton said it best. Between religious nuts and gun nuts (which are sometimes the same people. I’m looking at you “Christians”) I’m surprised the US hasn’t blown itself off the friggen map.

[This comment has been removed by a moderator]

Wesley Crusher said nothing sensible in his little Twitter hissy-fits.

The people you call “gun nuts” are people who responsibly own guns. SO how are they do blame. Secondly, the people you call “religious nuts”, in you words Christians, had nothing to do with this either. The shooter wasn’t Christian. Christians don’t throw people off buildings. Christians don’t advocate violence. Clearly Mr Plinkett you have a deep hatred of Christians so perhaps the finger of blame should be pointed at you.

I am an American. I love my country.
But I must be prepared, every day, to face the end of life because some crazy person, be s/he racist, homophobic, fundamentalist extremist, or just a total nutjob, could off me in a second.
If I lived elsewhere I’m not sure the odds against random destruction of human life would improve, but I have a feeling they would.

Actually, because you are a Western, American, white woman who served in the US Armed service, you would be target #1 by the crazies in our world. And even if that was not the case, most countries are managed by dangerous lunatics, and not just the theological kind. And putting all that aside, life expectancy is really BAD. Ergo, your feelings are misplaced. Understandable, but still…

Trying living in the Middle East for awhile.

[This comment has been removed by a moderator]