it takes a lone-sheepdog to stop a lone-wolf

[billthecat]

So maybe I'm just trying to be clever, but given all the talk of lone wolves and the challenge with stopping them, maybe "it takes a lone-sheepdog to stop a lone-wolf" has traction?

[masfonos]

I like it.  Cool take on the "it takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun" and plays on the media's narrative about "lone wolf" attacks. 

They keep calling these nutbags "lone wolf" attackers and say that they aren't acting under direct guidance/contact of any group.  I don't know why it is so hard for so many to grasp that this is PRECISELY what makes them that much more so dangerous.  The groups put out a call for action and these loonies hear it and act without direct support.  No money, no guns, no lawyers, no centralized leadership, no real plan necessary, no specific target location. 

Big Brother can't be everywhere all the time.  There is no way to guard against this type of war except for people to step up with the means and determination to protect themselves and what is important to them.

[LivingDeadGirl]

As we saw with the San Bernadino and Orlando shootings, the "see something, say something" doesn't matter either. In San Bernadino, neighbors saw something, but didn't want to call the cops for fear of being labeled racist and in Orlando, people said something, and nothing came of it.

So, if these "lone-wolf" attacks cannot be picked up through traditional investigation methods, it seems the only scenario that could stop the attack is the "lone-sheepdog" or the good guy with a gun who can fight back.  Like what we saw in Virginia, that didn't make national news, where a man shot three night club attendees, and a fourth attendee drew his weapon  and shot the shooter.   http://www.ammoland.com/2016/07/nightclub-shooter-shot-stopped-armed-permit-holder/

[Panther97]

Liberals want it both ways.  They call the attackers lone wolf attacks and say they aren't guided by ISIS or other groups.  But then they say that it isn't an muslim or islam problem even though all of the attackers have muslim religion in common.  If these attackers are doing the attacks on their own in the name of islam without anyone telling them to because they think thats what their religion calls for then the "religion" needs to be looked at closer.  If they are part of a group then they need hunted down and squashed.  They're not lone wolfs they are a part of a pack but everybody is too PC to say so!

[LivingDeadGirl]

And for some reason, only islam seems to "protected". I'm not a particularly religious person, but even I see the difference in the treatment of religion. I think people, mostly the left, forget that freedom of religion works in all directions.  What I really, really don't understand, is that the left and the large number of lgbt community members that support the left fail to see that islam sees "deviant" behavior as punishable by death. A recent survey in the UK of muslims showed 52% believe homosexuality should be illegal.   Polls of the countries where islam is the prominent religion, found that not only is homosexuality immoral, but so is alcohol consumption, abortion, and extra-martial sex. They also found that a vast majority believe you must believe in god to be moral and find polygamy to be acceptable.   Seems like a lot of the issues with christianity are also beliefs in islam. And it confuses me.

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-morality/