Another Mass Shooting, Florida (Gay) Nightclub, many injured (or dead)

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Buzzsaw**

A Town Called Malus wrote:
Buzzsaw wrote:

Edit:
It is especially telling that the person compiling that list has a fair bit of bias as they have failed to mention that the Ugandan population, regardless of religion, is very homophobic, to the point that Homosexuality is illegal and carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.
Huh? How is that either 'telling' or relevant to the discussion? Is the implication that mainstream Christianity is aptly represented by attitudes in Uganda?

It has failed to provide a comparison to the overall population attitudes of any of the countries examined. To use Uganda as an example it may be found that the overall attitude to homosexuality of the general population is similar or perhaps even worse than that of the muslim population.

First, that's a silly objection given that a large number of those countries are Moslem majority countries, and thus the 'general population' is the Moslem population. Second, there is no bias implied in not surveying everyone: it's a survey of the attitudes currently held by Moslems, surveying others is unrelated to its purpose.

Third, your objection is irrelevant to my original point: importing, say, 10,000 representative Jordanian Muslims will be importing approximately 9,600 people that consider homosexuality immoral. Is there a particular reason that people should not consider that when discussing immigration policies? Different groups hold different views, this is reality.

**BrotherGecko**

CptJake wrote:
BrotherGecko wrote:
I am having severe reservations to the narrative that a single man with an AR-15 and a handgun murdered 50 people. Without the rifle being a fully automatic and the shooter carrying a double combat load, there would have been multiple stops in shooting to reload. Most of his shots would have needed to be kill shots too.

I'm not trying to add unnecessary conspiracy to a tragedy but I worry for people if there is 1 or more gunmen on the loose.

Frankly it is easier to kill that many with semi-automatic fire than automatic fire. With auto you waste a lot of ammo and need to reload a lot more.

I'd disagree, simply because auto-fire was made for crowd control. If he had 30 rd magazines it would make it difficult but aim/shoot repeated with semi-auto would imply a good shot. 5.56 isn't going to put down everybody in a single shot.

I've seen so far its 50 dead and over 50 wounded. Without explosives (which I don't know if that has been confirmed/denied yet) that would be a significant feat for trained military with same weapons.

marv335 wrote:Easier than you would think in a crowded club, At those kinds of ranges you're going to get quite a few of through and through shots.

I really doubt that. 5.56 is not a through and through type bullet, its specifically designed not to do that. Unless he got his hands on M995s, through and through could account for some wounds but I doubt very many.

I feel like maybe this isn't right to continue this line of talking. I'm open to PMs to continue unless the thread/MODs decide its appropriate. Otherwise I'm dropping any further discussion upon reflection.

**Buzzsaw**

Hmm, yes, that seems like a fine idea. Sadly I'd wager there will be plenty of time to talk about the particulars of this incident as more information unfolds.

**Frazzled**

ISIL is now claiming responsibility for this terrorist attack.

**oldravenman3025**

Matthew wrote:
Is this the first real IS attack on US soil?

San Bernardino was carried out by two Muslims (one of them was from Syria, if I remember correctly) professing Islamic State sympathies. ISIS later publicly praised and embraced (figuratively) the two terrorists.

**NinthMusketeer**

Buzzsaw wrote:
Goliath wrote:
Rosebuddy wrote:
Goliath wrote:
This is neither the time nor the place. Take a long hard look at your life if your first thought upon seeing this news is "hmmm. How can I use this to make a political point?"

... A man just shot up a gay club, this is the perfect god damned time to bring up homophobia and how come the US specifically has so many shootings that this is simply "the most recent gun massacre". Especially against everyone who wants to make it about Muslims and/or people from the Middle East.

Anyone who claims that this is neither the time nor the place to talk about how deeply political this attack is would never find the time and place for it.
yes, but he wasn't discussing homophobia was he? He saw that someone with an Arabic name shot up a club full of lgbt people, and he realised that he had discovered the perfect fething time to criticise refugees and promote gun ownership. feth off with that gak.

Err, I'm moderately sure that he is making a sarcastic comment; that is, mocking people that hold the views he mentioned, not affirming them. I could be wrong, though that presumption informs my response to him.

NinthMusketeer wrote:
If only we hadn't allowed in muslin refugees.

If only the club's patrons had been carrying guns.

The situation would have been much better then.

Yes, it is entirely unreasonable for people to be concerned about the mass immigration of people from areas of the world that are nearly ubiquitously, virulently homophobic and Antisemetic.

Spoiler:

"Only in three countries do as many as one-in-ten Muslims say that homosexuality is morally acceptable: Uganda (12%), Mozambique (11%) and Bangladesh (10%).

In most countries surveyed, fewer than one-in-ten Muslims believe homosexual behavior is not a moral issue. The exceptions are Bangladesh (14%), Guinea Bissau (14%) and Bosnia-Herzegovina (10%)."

Reality is not always what we would like it to be, but failure to recognize reality does not change it.

Spoiler:

More to say that the man who committed the shooting was a citizen; refugee discussion is irrelevant because there were no refugees involved. People don't rave about preventing radicalization or examining the cause; they rave about keeping 'those dam refugees' out so they don't commit acts of terror. That is what I am referring to, it's the same sort of mindless hate that prompts actions such as this. But to caveat that; I am apathetic overall to the event because I understand it's the will of the masses that it is OK to not make any changes to address mass shootings. People want things to change sure, but by and large Americans aren't don't anything about it. Accordingly my post was more satire than political discussion. I don't think the situation is actually that simple and I was mocking a subset of those who do.

**Frazzled**

Alternatively if we kept his family out, 50 people would be alive this morning.

**oldravenman3025**

Goliath wrote:
NinthMusketeer wrote:
If only we hadn't allowed in muslin refugees.

If only the club's patrons had been carrying guns.

The situation would have been much better then.
This is neither the time nor the place. Take a long hard look at your life if your first thought upon seeing this news is "hmmm. How can I use this to make a political point?"

Agreed. But I'll point out that Obama has ALREADY called for "tougher laws" relating to access to handguns and so-called "assault weapons", in the wake of this tragedy, according to Time-Warner News.

I agree with others that this isn't the time and place for political posturing, but sympathy for the victims. But politicians are slime, regardless of their political affiliation.

**Matthew**

Frazzled wrote:
Alternatively if we kept his family out, 50 people would be alive this morning.

But where would his family go?

I am in no way promoting this, but... well, they're refugees, they need to go somewhere, and Europe can't take everything, expecially since the US is the reason many of them are on the run.

**SilverMK2**

Frazzled wrote:
Alternatively if we kept his family out, 50 people would be alive this morning.

Alternatively if America had any meaningful gun control, hadn't been getting involved in the middle east for years, etc, tens or even hundreds of thousands of people would be alive this morning, and this type of attack would be far less likely.

But then again, if wishes were horses we would all be eating steak...

**Killionaire**

I'd be very wary before people start getting out their 'ISIS agents' card, as if they were HYDRA or COBRA or something.

This is exceptionally fethed up. But anybody who's going to commit a mass hate crime in this way is fethed up. It's as likely that the shooter wasn't operating in coordination with IS, but just declared he was all for them. Then the gaks were all down to claim responsibility.

Alternatively if we kept his family out, 50 people would be alive this morning.

Gotcha. America is closed now, because there's a chance one in a few million could be a monster. Good thing only one ethnicity or background commits violent crime, right?

**Frazzled**

Matthew wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Alternatively if we kept his family out, 50 people would be alive this morning.

But where would his family go?

Only arguing the point here as the other poster brought it up, but in response to your query-who cares?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Killionaire wrote:
I'd be very wary before people start getting out their 'ISIS agents' card, as if they were HYDRA or COBRA or something.

This is exceptionally fethed up. But anybody who's going to commit a mass hate crime in this way is fethed up. It's as likely that the shooter wasn't operating in coordination with IS, but just declared he was all for them. Then the gaks were all down to claim responsibility.

Alternatively if we kept his family out, 50 people would be alive this morning.

Gotcha. America is closed now, because there's a chance one in a few million could be a monster. Good thing only one ethnicity or background commits violent crime, right?

Not disagreeing with you. Just responding to the post.
I'm much more concerned with the cartels now controlling vast swaths of the US Southern Border.

**oldravenman3025**

Matthew wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Alternatively if we kept his family out, 50 people would be alive this morning.

But where would his family go?

I am in no way promoting this, but... well, they're refugees, they need to go somewhere, and Europe can't take everything, expecially since the US is the reason many of them are on the run.

I'm of the view that Europe shouldn't have taken them at all. The majority of the so-called "refugees" flooding Europe are fighting age males, who abandoned their women and children in a warzone . And a portion of those are military deserters.

**Killionaire**

oldravenman3025 wrote:
Matthew wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Alternatively if we kept his family out, 50 people would be alive this morning.

But where would his family go?

I am in no way promoting this, but... well, they're refugees, they need to go somewhere, and Europe can't take everything, expecially since the US is the reason many of them are on the run.

I'm of the view that Europe shouldn't have taken them at all. The majority of the so-called "refugees" flooding Europe are fighting age males, who abandoned their women and children in a warzone . And a portion of those are military deserters.

Jesus.
'Majority' are fighting age males? Where on earth are you getting that from?
I like how 'Europe' is a single place, much like 'refugees' are mostly 18-30 year old men who threw away their spouses and kids.
'Portion are military deserters'. Yeah, well. That actually describes the population of every single nation on earth, doesn't it? And if your homeland is a civil-war torn warzone, by default not participating in the meatgrinder makes you a deserter, doesn't it?

Just delusional.

**Vaktathi**

The shooter apparently was US born, and was a state licensed security guard who had passed all sorts of screenings, short of disallowing arms and somehow magically knowing what people will do 30 years into their lives, gun control and refugees/immigration really has very little to do with this.

**Matthew**

Frazzled wrote:
Matthew wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Alternatively if we kept his family out, 50 people would be alive this morning.

But where would his family go?

Only arguing the point here as the other poster brought it up, but in response to your query-who cares?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Killionaire wrote:
I'd be very wary before people start getting out their 'ISIS agents' card, as if they were HYDRA or COBRA or something.

This is exceptionally fethed up. But anybody who's going to commit a mass hate crime in this way is fethed up. It's as likely that the shooter wasn't operating in coordination with IS, but just declared he was all for them. Then the gaks were all down to claim responsibility.

Alternatively if we kept his family out, 50 people would be alive this morning.

Gotcha. America is closed now, because there's a chance one in a few million could be a monster. Good thing only one ethnicity or background commits violent crime, right?

Not disagreeing with you. Just responding to the post.
I'm much more concerned with the cartels now controlling vast swaths of the US Southern Border.

Who cares? I agree taking in military-aged men isn't good, but... you can't just abandon them. What's the coast guard in Italy or Greece supposed to do? Why can't the US take responsibility for something it caused?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
You can't just cause a mess and then say "Nah, I'm not going to clean this up". You can't ignore such an issue.

**oldravenman3025**

SilverMK2 wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Alternatively if we kept his family out, 50 people would be alive this morning.

Alternatively if America had any meaningful gun control, hadn't been getting involved in the middle east for years, etc, tens or even hundreds of thousands of people would be alive this morning, and this type of attack would be far less likely.

But then again, if wishes were horses we would all be eating steak...

And if the United Kingdom didn't allow underground Sharia "courts" to operate, turn their backs on their former muslim subjects due to UN pressure in the 1940s, 50's, and 60's, allow muslim "patrols" to harrass women and gays on the streets (often with threats of violence), hypocritically allow Islamic preachers to call for violence and the "breeding out" of the kuffar in Europe while arresting critics for "hate speech", then we wouldn't have grooming gangs and sexual assaults against native women and children. And these kind of attacks would far less likely.

But like you said, if wishes were horses....and two can play that game.

**Ahtman**

Only three pages before this became a mod's delight. Good work OT.

**oldravenman3025**

Vaktathi wrote:
The shooter apparently was US born, and was a state licensed security guard who had passed all sorts of screenings, short of disallowing arms and somehow magically knowing what people will do 30 years into their lives, gun control and refugees/immigration really has very little to do with this.

Good point. And one I will take is good advice. On another note not directly related to your post, but in general........

I've said my piece in this thread. My sympathies goes out to the victims of this attack. But I'm going to avoid getting drawn into further political discussion in this thread. This is a touchy subject for me, since I knew two people who didn't get to go home from work in the World Trade Center on one September morning. That same day, I also nearly lost one of my in-laws (that I'm still rather fond of) who worked for the DoD at the Pentagon. If she hadn't been on an errand, she would have likely been dead, since her office was in the general vicinity of where that plane hit the building. I also saw first hand how the Saudis operate, and their arrogance, during Desert Shield and Desert Storm. I've also read the Koran and remember Salman Rushdie and the Iran Hostage Crisis. So, I have a pretty negative view of Islam in general, one that isn't appropriate for these boards.

So, I'll skip out on anymore politics on my part.

**SilverMK2**

oldravenman3025 wrote:
But like you said, if wishes were horses....and two can play that game.

Kind of my point... blaming people or things is pointless when you then don't do anything to make things better. The situation is what it is; what we do about it is what matters.

**TheMeanDM**

Frazzled wrote:
ISIL is now claiming responsibility for this terrorist attack.

It makes me wonder if this was..um...how do I say it....

If the media hadn't been putting what I feel as being premature in their constant, near immediate "this may be terrorism" and "this may be ISIS" line of coverage...it makes me wonder if they would have claimed responsibility or not...like..maybe they are just taking advantage of the *idea* that they are behind it when they really may not be.

**AlmightyWalrus**

Buzzsaw wrote:
A Town Called Malus wrote:
Buzzsaw wrote:

Edit:
It is especially telling that the person compiling that list has a fair bit of bias as they have failed to mention that the Ugandan population, regardless of religion, is very homophobic, to the point that Homosexuality is illegal and carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.
Huh? How is that either 'telling' or relevant to the discussion? Is the implication that mainstream Christianity is aptly represented by attitudes in Uganda?

It has failed to provide a comparison to the overall population attitudes of any of the countries examined. To use Uganda as an example it may be found that the overall attitude to homosexuality of the general population is similar or perhaps even worse than that of the muslim population.

First, that's a silly objection given that a large number of those countries are Moslem majority countries, and thus the 'general population' is the Moslem population. Second, there is no bias implied in not surveying everyone: it's a survey of the attitudes currently held by Moslems, surveying others is unrelated to its purpose.

84% of the population in Uganda is Christian. You're really not helping yourself out of the hole that you've dug for yourself.

**oldravenman3025**

SilverMK2 wrote:
oldravenman3025 wrote:
But like you said, if wishes were horses....and two can play that game.

Kind of my point... blaming people or things is pointless when you then don't do anything to make things better. The situation is what it is; what we do about it is what matters.

Agreed. We need to work for viable solutions and stop nonsense like this. Those people just went out for a good time, not looking to get slaughtered. We might not agree what solutions are best, but at least it's a better use of energy rather than fighting among ourselves.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Killionaire wrote:
oldravenman3025 wrote:
Matthew wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Alternatively if we kept his family out, 50 people would be alive this morning.

But where would his family go?

I am in no way promoting this, but... well, they're refugees, they need to go somewhere, and Europe can't take everything, expecially since the US is the reason many of them are on the run.

I'm of the view that Europe shouldn't have taken them at all. The majority of the so-called "refugees" flooding Europe are fighting age males, who abandoned their women and children in a warzone . And a portion of those are military deserters.

Jesus.
'Majority' are fighting age males? Where on earth are you getting that from?
I like how 'Europe' is a single place, much like 'refugees' are mostly 18-30 year old men who threw away their spouses and kids.
'Portion are military deserters'. Yeah, well. That actually describes the population of every single nation on earth, doesn't it? And if your homeland is a civil-war torn warzone, by default not participating in the meatgrinder makes you a deserter, doesn't it?

Just delusional.

I should've been more specific. I meant Syrian "refugees" . And that information comes from the United Nations High Commissioner of Refugees, who stated the 62% of Syrian "refugees" are military age, able-bodied males.. As much as I dispise the U.N., sometimes they do something useful.

And when I refer to "Europe", I refer to (predominately Western) EU countries that have accepted refugees en-mass (the countries that are big time welfare states are a favorite destination, with some preferring to go back rather than go to countries like Denmark). Eastern European countries have either restricted the numbers coming in, or close their borders altogether.

Most of the males of other groups left their families behind because of the dangers on trekking to Europe. When, or if, they ever come to Europe, the numbers will swell even larger.

**Mdlbuildr**

Vaktathi wrote:
The shooter apparently was US born, and was a state licensed security guard who had passed all sorts of screenings, short of disallowing arms and somehow magically knowing what people will do 30 years into their lives, gun control and refugees/immigration really has very little to do with this.

Errr, yeah but he was under FBI investigation twice and was a "person of interest". How in the world does someone like that get a license to carry? I'm as Pro Firearm as you're going to get, but that's screwed up.

**Buzzsaw**

AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Buzzsaw wrote:

Spoiler:

A Town Called Malus wrote:
Buzzsaw wrote:

Edit:
It is especially telling that the person compiling that list has a fair bit of bias as they have failed to mention that the Ugandan population, regardless of religion, is very homophobic, to the point that Homosexuality is illegal and carries a maximum sentence of life in prison.
Huh? How is that either 'telling' or relevant to the discussion? Is the implication that mainstream Christianity is aptly represented by attitudes in Uganda?

It has failed to provide a comparison to the overall population attitudes of any of the countries examined. To use Uganda as an example it may be found that the overall attitude to homosexuality of the general population is similar or perhaps even worse than that of the muslim population.

First, that's a silly objection given that a large number of those countries are Moslem majority countries, and thus the 'general population' is the Moslem population. Second, there is no bias implied in not surveying everyone: it's a survey of the attitudes currently held by Moslems, surveying others is unrelated to its purpose.

84% of the population in Uganda is Christian. You're really not helping yourself out of the hole that you've dug for yourself.

Do tell, what exactly is the "whole that 'I've' dug"? In the survey I was referring to, was it not the case that "a large number of those countries are Moslem majority countries"?

Are you seriously advocating that there is no widespread, violent antipathy towards homosexuals in Islam? Or are you simply doing a bit of a troll drive by?

**CptJake**

BrotherGecko wrote:
CptJake wrote:
BrotherGecko wrote:
I am having severe reservations to the narrative that a single man with an AR-15 and a handgun murdered 50 people. Without the rifle being a fully automatic and the shooter carrying a double combat load, there would have been multiple stops in shooting to reload. Most of his shots would have needed to be kill shots too.

I'm not trying to add unnecessary conspiracy to a tragedy but I worry for people if there is 1 or more gunmen on the loose.

Frankly it is easier to kill that many with semi-automatic fire than automatic fire. With auto you waste a lot of ammo and need to reload a lot more.

I'd disagree, simply because auto-fire was made for crowd control. If he had 30 rd magazines it would make it difficult but aim/shoot repeated with semi-auto would imply a good shot. 5.56 isn't going to put down everybody in a single shot.

I've seen so far its 50 dead and over 50 wounded. Without explosives (which I don't know if that has been confirmed/denied yet) that would be a significant feat for trained military with same weapons.

marv335 wrote:Easier than you would think in a crowded club, At those kinds of ranges you're going to get quite a few of through and through shots.

I really doubt that. 5.56 is not a through and through type bullet, its specifically designed not to do that. Unless he got his hands on M995s, through and through could account for some wounds but I doubt very many.

I feel like maybe this isn't right to continue this line of talking. I'm open to PMs to continue unless the thread/MODs decide its appropriate. Otherwise I'm dropping any further discussion upon reflection.

No, Automatic fire was not made for crowd control.

**Ouze**

oldravenman3025 wrote:
Agreed. But I'll point out that Obama has ALREADY called for "tougher laws" relating to access to handguns and so-called "assault weapons", in the wake of this tragedy, according to Time-Warner News.

I agree with others that this isn't the time and place for political posturing, but sympathy for the victims. But politicians are slime, regardless of their political affiliation.

I hope this isn't true.

**Buzzsaw**

Ouze wrote:
oldravenman3025 wrote:
Agreed. But I'll point out that Obama has ALREADY called for "tougher laws" relating to access to handguns and so-called "assault weapons", in the wake of this tragedy, according to Time-Warner News.

I agree with others that this isn't the time and place for political posturing, but sympathy for the victims. But politicians are slime, regardless of their political affiliation.

I doubt very much this is true.

I don't know about President Obama personally, but it is the case that several Democratic politicians have already made calls for gun control or blamed lack of gun control for this event.

**oldravenman3025**

Ouze wrote:
oldravenman3025 wrote:
Agreed. But I'll point out that Obama has ALREADY called for "tougher laws" relating to access to handguns and so-called "assault weapons", in the wake of this tragedy, according to Time-Warner News.

I agree with others that this isn't the time and place for political posturing, but sympathy for the victims. But politicians are slime, regardless of their political affiliation.

I doubt very much this is true.

It's true, unfortunately. YahooNews also mentions it.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/president-obamas-statement-more-reactions-182000693.html?nhp=1

**Ouze**

I found the full remarks which - I'm more than a little embarrassed to admit - were on the front page of whitehouse.gov. oops.

Read the President's full remarks:

Today, as Americans, we grieve the brutal murder -- a horrific massacre -- of dozens of innocent people. We pray for their families, who are grasping for answers with broken hearts. We stand with the people of Orlando, who have endured a terrible attack on their city. Although it’s still early in the investigation, we know enough to say that this was an act of terror and an act of hate. And as Americans, we are united in grief, in outrage, and in resolve to defend our people.

I just finished a meeting with FBI Director Comey and my homeland security and national security advisors. The FBI is on the scene and leading the investigation, in partnership with local law enforcement. I’ve directed that the full resources of the federal government be made available for this investigation.
We are still learning all the facts. This is an open investigation. We’ve reached no definitive judgment on the precise motivations of the killer. The FBI is appropriately investigating this as an act of terrorism. And I’ve directed that we must spare no effort to determine what -- if any -- inspiration or association this killer may have had with terrorist groups. What is clear is that he was a person filled with hatred. Over the coming days, we’ll uncover why and how this happened, and we will go wherever the facts lead us.

This morning I spoke with my good friend, Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer, and I conveyed the condolences of the entire American people. This could have been any one of our communities. So I told Mayor Dyer that whatever help he and the people of Orlando need -- they are going to get it. As a country, we will be there for the people of Orlando today, tomorrow and for all the days to come.

We also express our profound gratitude to all the police and first responders who rushed into harm’s way. Their courage and professionalism saved lives, and kept the carnage from being even worse. It’s the kind of sacrifice that our law enforcement professionals make every single day for all of us, and we can never thank them enough.

This is an especially heartbreaking day for all our friends -- our fellow Americans -- who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. The shooter targeted a nightclub where people came together to be with friends, to dance and to sing, and to live. The place where they were attacked is more than a nightclub -- it is a place of solidarity and empowerment where people have come together to raise awareness, to speak their minds, and to advocate for their civil rights.

So this is a sobering reminder that attacks on any American -- regardless of race, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation -- is an attack on all of us and on the fundamental values of equality and dignity that define us as a country. And no act of hate or terror will ever change who we are or the values that make us Americans.

Today marks the most deadly shooting in American history. The shooter was apparently armed with a handgun and a powerful assault rifle. This massacre is therefore a further reminder of how easy it is for someone to get their hands on a weapon that lets them shoot people in a school, or in a house of worship, or a movie theater, or in a nightclub. And we have to decide if that’s the kind of country we want to be. And to actively do nothing is a decision as well.

In the coming hours and days, we’ll learn about the victims of this tragedy. Their names. Their faces. Who they were. The joy that they brought to families and to friends, and the difference that they made in this world. Say a prayer for them and say a prayer for their families -- that God give them the strength to bear the unbearable. And that He give us all the strength to be there for them, and the strength and courage to change. We need to demonstrate that we are defined more -- as a country -- by the way they lived their lives than by the hate of the man who took them from us.

As we go together, we will draw inspiration from heroic and selfless acts -- friends who helped friends, took care of each other and saved lives. In the face of hate and violence, we will love one another. We will not give in to fear or turn against each other. Instead, we will stand united, as Americans, to protect our people, and defend our nation, and to take action against those who threaten us.

May God bless the Americans we lost this morning. May He comfort their families. May God continue to watch over this country that we love. Thank you.