They even shot the dog!

No doubt!

9xk3ao.jpg (click to show) who is the guy in the mask?

Honestly, I was confused by the various images of the guy.

Wow, this whole thing could get complicated.

Nasty stuff.

Yes. It's just so horrible, so tragic, so unnecessary, and so crazy.

Worse, it seems all too likely that this kind of thing will happen again and again in coming years.

Yeah, well, tell us something we don't know. US will never give up its guns over their dead bodies (quite literally) so that argument is dead in the water unless someone can ever change the Constitution/Sacred Parchment, and I'm not sure anyone can.

Hell will freeze over before the US gets tough on gun control like most other developed democratic nations where stories like this are virtually unheard of. So stuff like this is just "part and parcel" of living in the US. Better get used to it, folks (if you aren't already). That's the price of freedom. So yes, "this kind of thing will happen again and again in coming years". It already does. And will keep happening for generations to come. Not much we can do about that. It's baked into the US psyche.

Shooting the dog for kicks was an extra low bar though (dog probably didn't even vote), but then the guy seems to have not been in a particularly rational mental state tbf.

(Just another "mentally ill" white guy. Of course, had he been a Muslim, especially a Muslim who wasn't white, the narrative would be a bit different. We all know how that goes... Now we'll get to watch gushing documentaries about how a good Christian preacher and devoted husband and father to 5 kids who devoted his life to helping disadvantaged people suffered a tragic mental health crisis and moment of poor judgement. If only he'd reached out to a friend or taken the time to speak to a trusted friend. (Seriously, men, talk about your feelings before it's too late.)

If only he'd been a Muslim; that would just be your run-of-the-mill Islamic terrorist incident and a further indication that the invasion continues and we need to get tough on illegals. Muslims don't suffer mental health breakdowns; they're totally in their right minds when they mow down innocents at German Xmas markets. It's just that they're taught to murder infidels at the mosque every Friday because their religion 100% teaches and condones that, doncha know? It's literally in their Scripture.

Obligatory /s tag for some Americans who don't get irony or sarcasm.)

Anyway, dark jokes aside, it's a horrible thing for the victims to go through. That woman didn't deserve this. It's one thing to be vehemently opposed to her views on abortion because you believe she's complicit in the silent genocide of babies; it's another to gun her and her husband down in cold blood.

What is really tragic is that we let our society reach this point. Dialogue broke down. So now we get violence

Yes, instead of gun crimes you hear of ninja sword crimes, kitchen knife crimes, and vehicular manslaughter crimes. The numbers are about the same too. Same number of victims.
You know where you don't hear of these crimes? Places like Texas whet every 3rd person is wearing a gun. Every once in a blue moon someone will try something at a gun free zone, but won't get far.

As to Muslims. Go read their holy book, then come back and apologize for the sarcasm.

Those crimes exist, yes, but I'd dispute your assertion that the "numbers are about the same". They're also much less common than mass shootings in the US, and much less lethal. You can do damage with a ninja sword or machete, sure. But it's not on the same level as a semiautomatic rifle. And when it does happen, it's usually so shocking and unusual that it's all over the news.

Compare US mass shootings (and frequency) in 2025 alone with mass stabbing incidents in Europe over a longer time period:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2025

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category%3AMass_stabbings_in_Europe

Granted, that's Wikipedia and it's not an exhaustive list. But it gives a quick overview. And of course the populations of the US and Europe (depending how you delineate it) are different. (Actually Europe has around double the population, so if anything it should witness more mass killing incidents than the US, not less.)

Cars also have been used for lethal effect. But again, those incidents are very rare. Unlike shootings in the US, which are a bit more frequent...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_vehicle-ramming_attacks

As for the belief that civilians being armed reduces the risk of mass shootings, I'm not sure that's been conclusively established. I think actually the opposite has been found to be the case. Increased gun ownership correlates with higher homicide rates. As examples (you can make of this what you will):

https://giffords.org/analysis/the-good-guy-with-a-gun-myth/

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/debunking-myths-the-gun-lobby-perpetuates-following-mass-shootings/

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/key-findings/what-science-tells-us-about-the-effects-of-gun-policies.html

A lot of those statistics are skewed because of voluntary reporting (or lack therof). When you look at statistics where everything is reported by both sides you find that it is in fact true that there are less shootings where guns are prevalent and most shootings are only in gun free zones.

Okay. Feel free to provide credible sources to back up your claim.

All I know is.. mass shootings are all too common in the US (where you worship guns) and they're almost unheard of in... most of the rest of the civilized world to the point that we barely think about it because it's basically not even a thing and no one I know even worries about it). So I'm interested to see your peer-reviewed studies that debunk my arguments.

We don't worship guns. We know that all times in history that governments abused their citizens, it was always a disarmed populace.
We know that the ability to defend ourselves from criminals and animals and governments is more important than events that are rarer than getting struck by lightning.

As for your point on the Qur'an, I have had a look at it, yes. It's arguably a lot less violent than the Old Testament, actually.

A few examples from the OT. You could argue that context matters (or that OT morality no longer applies since Christ), but you can argue similarly for the Qur’an.

1 Samuel 15:3

"Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys."

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%2015%3A3&version=NIV

Numbers 31: 17–18

"Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2031%3A17-18&version=NIV

Psalm 137:9

"Happy is the one who seizes your infants
and dashes them against the rocks."

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%20137%3A9&version=NIV

Bit violent, no? Now compare the Qur'an. Most of these also refer to specific battles and are not generic commands to attack non-believers.

Q2:191

"Kill them wherever you come upon them and drive them out of the places from which they have driven you out. For persecution is far worse than killing. And do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque unless they attack you there. If they do so, then fight them—that is the reward of the disbelievers."

https://quran.com/al-baqarah/191

Q9:5 [the famous “Sword Verse”]

"But once the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists ˹who violated their treaties˺ wherever you find them, capture them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them on every way. But if they repent, perform prayers, and pay alms-tax, then set them free. Indeed, Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful."

https://quran.com/en/at-tawbah/5

Q47:4

"So when you meet the disbelievers ˹in battle˺, strike ˹their˺ necks until you have thoroughly subdued them, then bind them firmly. Later ˹free them either as˺ an act of grace or by ransom until the war comes to an end. So will it be. Had Allah willed, He ˹Himself˺ could have inflicted punishment on them. But He does ˹this only to˺ test some of you by means of others. And those who are martyred in the cause of Allah, He will never render their deeds void."

https://quran.com/muhammad/4

If you argue that Muslims are taught to be violent from these verses, you can equally argue that Christians or Jews are taught the same from their own holy books.

In the old testament when God commanded the Israelites to completely destroy a tribe, it was because they were diseased, child r*pists, who sacrificed children to idols, burning them alive, and spreadingtheir diseases through intercourse with them. They also taught their children to do the same. Without modern plague fighting knowledge and equipment that would be the only way to eradicate disease. Many times they were commanded to drive them out or take them prisoner for a decade as servants (slaves, but they couldown their own money, marry, and buy their freedom, with strict laws about mistreatment) .

Also these were specific commands against specific tribes before a war over their ancestral land. They don't apply today because those tribes no longer exist (or they are completely different today)

Your psalms reference is out of context. They are talking about returning upon their enemies what was done to them. Note is doesn't say "sanctified is the one who..." or "holy is the one who..." it says happy as in they got revenge.

Your Quran references on the other hand are about types of people and you missed a few where they say to kill Christians on sight.

If you read the Bible in context you'll find that is almost entirely about peace and coexistence. Parts even say to allow Travellers to join the Israelites as long as they go through a ritual.

The entire new testament is about peace.

I agree the NT is much more about peace and forgiveness (not entirely, though). But mainstream Christians generally believe the entire Bible is the inspired Word of God. Even Jesus himself said:

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Matthew%205%3A17

And again, "not one jot or tittle":

"For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled."

(Jot here referring to the Hebrew letter yod (Y), which is very small and could almost be mistaken for a splash of ink. A "tittle" refers to the flourish on some letters, like dotting your Is or crossing your Ts. The idea being that Jesus wasn't claiming to change even the tiniest part of the Mosaic law.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tittle

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%205%3A17-18&version=NIV

Point taken about Psalm 137. The Hebrew word translated "happy" in English is אַשְׁרֵי

Meaning "happy" or "blessèd". It's possible the writer was using hyperbole in response to previous actions. Still not a particularly nice image though. Not sure Buddhist Scriptures have similar passages about smashing babies' heads against rocks...

But we don't judge modern Jews and Christians based on these violent verses. Is it fair to judge Muslims in 2025 by the same standards, especially given the Qur'an is arguably far less violent than the OT? It mentions Hellfire a "hell" of a lot. But not nearly as much actual smiting and *very* questionable morality (slavery & genocide is a bit old-school, no offence) If you're gonna argue Muslims are violent by definition based on their "holy" book, then I invite you to take a look at your own "holy" book, which arguably contains far worse. Are you all violent smiters inspired by the OT?

Or any number of questionable verses (Lot getting drunk and impregnated by his own daughters? The Qur'an has nothing even comparable to that. (If you can find any verses, I'm all ears btw.) It just says you're gonna burn in hell a lot. It tends to repeat that a lot.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2019%3A30-38&version=NIV

Selling his daughters as sex slaves to a mob:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2019%3A4-8&version=NIV)

TL;DR: The Bible is far more violent than the Qur'an. CMV.

Verses that prescribe violence:
Bible: ~0.5% or less (~100–150 verses out of 31,102).
Quran: ~0.8–1.6% (~50–100 verses out of 6,236).

Lots daughters sinned and got him so drunk he didn't know what he was doing. That's a story of what not to do. A cautionary tale of the dangers of alcohol.

The verses where lot gives up his daughters to the mob don't say whether he was doing good or evil. Only a retelling of what he did. Since the Bible clearly says any kind of sex outside marriage is sin, we can infer that it was a sinful act. Later he gets extremely drunk so we know lot isn't exactly a sin free person.

The Bible may recount more violence than the Quran, it's also much longer, the Quran prescribes more violence of its followers.

Yup, never in Texas, ever, where the state motto is, "Well at least we're not as dangerous as Alaska"

Nah, the most dangerous places in the US don't report their crime statistics.

What Modda means is we need facts, boyo (or girlo). Provide credible sources.

Otherwise it's fakenooz.

Make big claims equals you need big evidence.

Yes, they state it on the government crime statistics website. Not sure what you are talking about.

This is why Trump has no pets.

Right, because some crazed moonbat would kill his pets too.

Bribem had to send his dogs to the "farm" because they kept biting secret service agents... LOL