Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-08-2015, 11:40 PM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,707,495 times
Reputation: 20674

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ih2puo View Post
Reports now that Tashfeen was an operative.
Reports are that they are investigating if she was an operative. No conclusions have been drawn, yet.

 
Old 12-09-2015, 12:00 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,707,495 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post
Until we hear from the Feds; it is a good presumption that he borrowed the money. But it could have been funneled to him; we will find out in the future.


You have a valid point about how much he knew about banking. Actually the tellers will sometimes tell you that $5,000 or more has to be reported. So I don't know why he did not just make withdrawals of $4,999? As far as I understand; that would have not triggered the reporting requirements.


PS Can you get us the 44% return on an investment?
He definitely borrowed the funds, using a peer to peer online lending facility. Such loans are unsecured and based on employment history and established credit. Many use such loans to consolidate debt or buy a car.

Identities of borrowers are not disclosed to investors, not that it would have mattered before the attack. It's all based on a proprietary credit score.

Peer to peer lending typically offers loans at rates lower than a bank who uses FDIC insured deposits.

Farooq's bank records established the audit trail for the three $5000 transfers to his mother. Such transactions would not have been flagged. Doing so, implicated his mother, regardless of his intent. The actual timing of the loans deposit and subsequent cash withdrawal and transfers have not been made public.
 
Old 12-09-2015, 12:04 AM
 
27,119 posts, read 15,300,057 times
Reputation: 12055
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
I doubt seriously if you have EVER read ANYTHING the NRA has said.

Don't forget a few box cutters killed hundreds on 9-11



..........and in turn, thousands.
 
Old 12-09-2015, 05:59 AM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
18,780 posts, read 18,121,941 times
Reputation: 14777
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
He definitely borrowed the funds, using a peer to peer online lending facility. Such loans are unsecured and based on employment history and established credit. Many use such loans to consolidate debt or buy a car.

Identities of borrowers are not disclosed to investors, not that it would have mattered before the attack. It's all based on a proprietary credit score.

Peer to peer lending typically offers loans at rates lower than a bank who uses FDIC insured deposits.

Farooq's bank records established the audit trail for the three $5000 transfers to his mother. Such transactions would not have been flagged. Doing so, implicated his mother, regardless of his intent. The actual timing of the loans deposit and subsequent cash withdrawal and transfers have not been made public.



Here is some more information: California shooters borrowed $28,000 before attack: source.


One interesting piece of information from that report was right at the end of the video. Apparently, last year, they had one active shooter drill in the convention center and they are not sure if the shooter/s took part in that drill!
 
Old 12-09-2015, 06:19 AM
 
58,973 posts, read 27,267,735 times
Reputation: 14265
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
Seems that an AR-15, which can fire 45 to 60 shots per minute, is fully capable of assaulting a room full of victims. What is your definition of "assault?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
Yep. This happens all the time. Home owner Rambo takes out multiple crooks who broke into his home with 10 round mags each.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
Correct. In fact, the military will be trading in their firearms for assault cars instead.
" What is your definition of "assault?"

you REALLY are grasping at straws now.

NO ONE is denying what the word "assault" means

I know it is hard for you to keep up but, YOU keep going on and on on what an "assault weapon" is.

"Yep. This happens all the time. Home owner Rambo takes out multiple crooks who broke into his home with 10 round mags each."

Once would be enough.

"Correct. In fact, the military will be trading in their firearms for assault cars instead"

If you want to act like a child, will treat you as one.

You have made yourself to look foolish with your constant evading the questions and making false statement.

I suggest you quit before you become the laughing stock on c-D
 
Old 12-09-2015, 06:44 AM
 
58,973 posts, read 27,267,735 times
Reputation: 14265
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc View Post
Whose definition? Automatic does not do it. Some definition include semi-automatics and the classical army definition requires selective fire. They also require an intermediate sized cartridge and a detachable magazine. So anything that can handle full rifle cartridges cannot be an assault rifle to some definitions.

I suggest that the whole thing is a silly semantic defense thrown up by the gunnies to avoid dealing with the issue. The antis need to coin a term for a weapon with high rate of delivery capability. Kid whacker would be good and is nicely pejorative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc View Post
Well when it comes to definitions I think Merriam Webster outranks you and the other gunnies. They say semi or auto. Now if you work for the DoD you can probably claim in your domain it is auto only though actually the term of art there is "selective" not auto. But in the wide world Merriam Webster reigns.
"and the classical army definition requires selective fire'" AKA, FULLY AUTOMATIC

BINGO, we have winner.

We are talking about MILITARY weapons and the MILITARY DETERMINES DEFINITIONS.

Not Clinton, NOT Merriam's dictionary, NOT the liberal anti-gunners.

The Clinton admin "stole" the name in order to use emotion to convince the American public that "military" weapons should NOT be available to the general public.

They chose to "decieve" the American public by banning "cosmetic" things on guns to stir up EMOTIONS and the liberal media sucked it right up.

The blind anti-gunners did also and jumped on the band wagon.

Of course statistics show that AFTER the ban was put into place, NO SIGNIFICANT changes occurred as we predicted..

NO SEMI-AUTOMATIC is an "assault" weapon.

All the anti-gunners can twist and turn and come up with ANY ridiculous thing they want and it doesn't mean a thing.

It IS what it IS!
 
Old 12-09-2015, 06:50 AM
 
58,973 posts, read 27,267,735 times
Reputation: 14265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Yes, back in the 1960's the military M16 was based on the same design as an AR-15 civilian version, there is very little difference.
"there is very little difference." ONLY in LOOKS

The functionality difference is MASSIVE.
 
Old 12-09-2015, 06:54 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,971 posts, read 44,780,079 times
Reputation: 13681
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc View Post
Sure you could. And the government puts a $10,000 bounty on such a weapon and locks you up for 5 years when a neighbor or friend squeals on you.
If he's Muslim, no problem. Everyone will be afraid to call in a tip for fear of being branded a racist/xenophobe.
 
Old 12-09-2015, 07:05 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,971 posts, read 44,780,079 times
Reputation: 13681
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
What makes you think these gang members bought their guns illegally?
Hmmm... Maybe because Chicago gang gun killings are done with illegal weapons?

Police focus on seizing guns to combat Chicago gang murders | Reuters
 
Old 12-09-2015, 07:29 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,707,495 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Hmmm... Maybe because Chicago gang gun killings are done with illegal weapons?

Police focus on seizing guns to combat Chicago gang murders | Reuters
Between 1/2013-9/2015, 5700 illegal gun cases were prosecuted in Chicago and were won about 70% of the time. Most were confiscated in gang infested neighborhoods where guns are often sold out of car trunks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:34 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top