Toronto Van Incident April 2018

InsaneIntruder wrote:

Dunkelziffer wrote:

These vehicle-ramming type attacks get kind of frequent. It's such an ugly and lazy method. Didn't Lanza write something to that effect? How he could not get into this method because it was too unpersonal?

That's why people do it. Because it's lazy. All you have to do is get a car and drive it into a crowd of people. Simple as that. That's why they're so frequent, you don't need to plan it a lot, it doesn't require a ton of intellect to get a high score (while for a bombing for example it does) and even with strict gun laws you can still do it as countries would never ban cars.

Yes, exactly. It's easy, cheap and can be done without a lot of preparation. Getting (and hiding) guns (or other materials), making plans, planning diversions etc. is work. But renting a van and plowing in a group of people, no problem.
This last christmas I saw large temporary concrete pollers at the entrance to the local christmas market. So this is the solution to the subject of "baning vans because they could be used in a ramming attack".

There was a Toronto Maple Leaf game here the evening after the attack. Security and Police placed large cement blocks around the area people would be walking on the sidewalks on thier way to the game. To protect them from any other type of attack. I've read that exterior landscaping has changed in Europe to help protect people from these kinds of attacks.

I don't understand the mentality of "i hate being celibate so I'm going to kill a bunch of innocent people."
It's completely beyond my understanding ...if true.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sent from Topic'it App

Undyne wrote:

"What are they going to suggest next, ban vehicles!?"

No, because vehicles, unlike guns, have a purpose outside of killing/injuring things.  Glad I could shoot this stupid talking point down.

Man you're dense.

Dunkelziffer wrote:

InsaneIntruder wrote:

Dunkelziffer wrote:

These vehicle-ramming type attacks get kind of frequent. It's such an ugly and lazy method. Didn't Lanza write something to that effect? How he could not get into this method because it was too unpersonal?

That's why people do it. Because it's lazy. All you have to do is get a car and drive it into a crowd of people. Simple as that. That's why they're so frequent, you don't need to plan it a lot, it doesn't require a ton of intellect to get a high score (while for a bombing for example it does) and even with strict gun laws you can still do it as countries would never ban cars.

Yes, exactly. It's easy, cheap and can be done without a lot of preparation. Getting (and hiding) guns (or other materials), making plans, planning diversions etc. is work. But renting a van and plowing in a group of people, no problem.
This last christmas I saw large temporary concrete pollers at the entrance to the local christmas market. So this is the solution to the subject of "baning vans because they could be used in a ramming attack".

Exactly.
Also if I recall correctly, went I went to Times Square there were blocks of stone on the sidewalk which were apparently there to stop vehicles.

QuestionMark wrote:

Undyne wrote:

"What are they going to suggest next, ban vehicles!?"

No, because vehicles, unlike guns, have a purpose outside of killing/injuring things.  Glad I could shoot this stupid talking point down.

Man you're dense.

Care to offer a counterpoint?

This braindead talking point is all over Twitter and elsewhere because these people literally do not know the primary function of a vehicle vs. a gun.

ban assault vans omgg!!!!111

Great now this is going to demonise all Incels and make all of them seem like misogynists who hate women and support violence.

Tommy QTR wrote:

Great now this is going to demonise all Incels and make all of them seem like misogynists who hate women and support violence.    

 It likely will. But if you are truly a part of that community then be a voice for the ones that aren't violent or women hating.

InsaneIntruder wrote:

Dunkelziffer wrote:

InsaneIntruder wrote:

Dunkelziffer wrote:

These vehicle-ramming type attacks get kind of frequent. It's such an ugly and lazy method. Didn't Lanza write something to that effect? How he could not get into this method because it was too unpersonal?

That's why people do it. Because it's lazy. All you have to do is get a car and drive it into a crowd of people. Simple as that. That's why they're so frequent, you don't need to plan it a lot, it doesn't require a ton of intellect to get a high score (while for a bombing for example it does) and even with strict gun laws you can still do it as countries would never ban cars.

Yes, exactly. It's easy, cheap and can be done without a lot of preparation. Getting (and hiding) guns (or other materials), making plans, planning diversions etc. is work. But renting a van and plowing in a group of people, no problem.
This last christmas I saw large temporary concrete pollers at the entrance to the local christmas market. So this is the solution to the subject of "baning vans because they could be used in a ramming attack".

Exactly.
Also if I recall correctly, went I went to Times Square there were blocks of stone on the sidewalk which were apparently there to stop vehicles.

Just read about a new direct energy weapon that uses high-powered microwaves to stop cars the Defense Department’s Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Program [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] is developing.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

We will be standing in the streets and toss microwaves at vehicles.

Dunkelziffer wrote:

InsaneIntruder wrote:

Dunkelziffer wrote:

InsaneIntruder wrote:

Dunkelziffer wrote:

These vehicle-ramming type attacks get kind of frequent. It's such an ugly and lazy method. Didn't Lanza write something to that effect? How he could not get into this method because it was too unpersonal?

That's why people do it. Because it's lazy. All you have to do is get a car and drive it into a crowd of people. Simple as that. That's why they're so frequent, you don't need to plan it a lot, it doesn't require a ton of intellect to get a high score (while for a bombing for example it does) and even with strict gun laws you can still do it as countries would never ban cars.

Yes, exactly. It's easy, cheap and can be done without a lot of preparation. Getting (and hiding) guns (or other materials), making plans, planning diversions etc. is work. But renting a van and plowing in a group of people, no problem.
This last christmas I saw large temporary concrete pollers at the entrance to the local christmas market. So this is the solution to the subject of "baning vans because they could be used in a ramming attack".

Exactly.
Also if I recall correctly, went I went to Times Square there were blocks of stone on the sidewalk which were apparently there to stop vehicles.

Just read about a new direct energy weapon that uses high-powered microwaves to stop cars the Defense Department’s Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Program [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] is developing.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

We will be standing in the streets and toss microwaves at vehicles.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  Well whatever works right?

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

Great now this is going to demonise all Incels and make all of them seem like misogynists who hate women and support violence.    

 It likely will. But if you are truly a part of that community then be a voice for the ones that aren't violent or women hating.

The majority of Incels aren't, it's just a very vocal minority that are.

Tommy QTR wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

Great now this is going to demonise all Incels and make all of them seem like misogynists who hate women and support violence.    

 It likely will. But if you are truly a part of that community then be a voice for the ones that aren't violent or women hating.

The majority of Incels aren't, it's just a very vocal minority that are.

That small minority are giving you all a bad rep.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

Great now this is going to demonise all Incels and make all of them seem like misogynists who hate women and support violence.    

 It likely will. But if you are truly a part of that community then be a voice for the ones that aren't violent or women hating.

And the media will only focus on the small minority while painting all Incels with the same brush.

Tommy QTR wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Tommy QTR wrote:

Great now this is going to demonise all Incels and make all of them seem like misogynists who hate women and support violence.    

 It likely will. But if you are truly a part of that community then be a voice for the ones that aren't violent or women hating.

And the media will only focus on the small minority while painting all Incels with the same brush.

True.

Undyne wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

Undyne wrote:

"What are they going to suggest next, ban vehicles!?"

No, because vehicles, unlike guns, have a purpose outside of killing/injuring things.  Glad I could shoot this stupid talking point down.

Man you're dense.

Care to offer a counterpoint?

This braindead talking point is all over Twitter and elsewhere because these people literally do not know the primary function of a vehicle vs. a gun.

You're missing the point completely. The point is that if you ban guns, then the next killer will use something else to kill people with. And you can't exactly ban cars or knives.

Um yah...?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sent from Topic'it App

Oldmare wrote:

Um yah...?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sent from Topic'it App

Oh.

Looks like he might not have been an incel.

QuestionMark wrote:

Oldmare wrote:

Um yah...?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sent from Topic'it App

Oh.

Looks like he might not have been an incel.

that was good ol' inspect element

also love how the media blamed an innocent man 2 get clicks
thats like if the attacker was named joe smith and the first pic on google images you use

QuestionMark wrote:

Oldmare wrote:

Um yah...?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sent from Topic'it App

Oh.

Looks like he might not have been an incel.

he was an incel,here is the archive [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

QuestionMark wrote:

Undyne wrote:

QuestionMark wrote:

Undyne wrote:

"What are they going to suggest next, ban vehicles!?"

No, because vehicles, unlike guns, have a purpose outside of killing/injuring things.  Glad I could shoot this stupid talking point down.

Man you're dense.

Care to offer a counterpoint?

This braindead talking point is all over Twitter and elsewhere because these people literally do not know the primary function of a vehicle vs. a gun.

You're missing the point completely. The point is that if you ban guns, then the next killer will use something else to kill people with. And you can't exactly ban cars or knives.

1.  It's far, far harder for one person to kill a ton of people with a knife vs a gun.
2.  Okay, let's think about a highly unlikely future where vehicle massacres have topped gun massacres in the US.  Hardly anyone would suggest banning vehicles because VEHICLES HAVE A PURPOSE OUTSIDE OF KILLING.  

Also, research suggests that more guns do not stop more crimes:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Also also, I never argued that way stricter gun control would completely solve America's violence problem.  We need to fix our nation's gross inequality problem but I guess that's just me being a social justice warrior.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

undertale fan lol

but assault vans r a srs problem now and we need 2 ban them ok

More info on Alek Minassian.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Apparently he used to make meowing noises and try and bite people.

He admitted he stopped the van because he couldn't clean the windshield, did the wipers get damaged or did he not know how to use them?