BREAKING: Gunmen Attack University in Kenya

WASR-10

Kenya is one of the nations in Africa with the strictest gun control laws, but once again armed terrorists are attacking unarmed and defenseless civilians with firearms they obtained anyway. Al Jazeera is reporting around five masked gunmen are attacking a university in northern Kenya, and “many casualties” are said to be involved. The gunmen are currently holding hostages, and the situation is continuing to evolve. This latest attack comes as states in the US are considering campus carry bills, which would allow students in the US to defend themselves against just such an attack if it were to happen here.

comments

  1. avatar MurrDog says:

    Does this count as a micro or macro aggression……

    1. avatar B says:

      Workplace violence, unless they are conservative,white, or Christian/Jewish. Then its terrorism.

  2. avatar Buster says:

    Did they not have a sign posted that read “Gun Free Zone”?

    1. avatar 16V says:

      It was very effective in Rwanda I hear.

    2. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      Yes, but unless it’s printed in both English and Kiswahili, it doesn’t carry the force of law. More lives lost to a technicality and lax gun laws. I blame the Kenyan Rifle Association.

  3. avatar ThomasR says:

    “If one of the students or teachers had a gun, it would just make it worse”.

    The fact that so many people believe this is what is so bizarre. I honestly cannot even wrap my mind around how anyone can not only think this but actually say it with all seriousness.

    1. avatar John says:

      I wonder… What are they picturing as ‘worse’? Is deterred or dead assailants worse than dead students and teachers?

      I sort of agree, though. If only one victim was armed it may not have helped much. if many or most of the victims were armed, the balance of power shifts a bit.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Unfortunately, one person with a handgun versus 5 attackers with rifles has very little chance of surviving. Nevertheless, it is their right to be armed regardless of how effective their firearm might be in any given situation. And they might have been able to take out two or three attackers in the process. I don’t see any down side to responsible armed students.

        1. avatar MarkPA says:

          I think that there are 2 shifts of consciousness that need to take place.
          First, one’s mind must grasp the idea that your mom doesn’t live here anymore and that there is really no one to protect you. The police can’t get there in time; and, when they arrive, there is a limit to what they can do. Are you willing to take up arms yourself. Not too ambitious here; just: Will you carry a concealed weapon? Will you allow your classmates to carry concealed weapons?
          If one’s mind can’t grasp this idea then the second is beyond consideration.
          Second: Having decided to defend oneself; or, to allow one’s classmates to defend you, then what would constitute an adequate defense? For rape or robbery, just one handgun. For a terrorist attack, a few handguns could contain a 1 or a few perpetrators for a few minutes until others arrived. A few more students with handguns could buy another couple of minutes for the cops with long guns. Not a pretty picture.
          After we have suffered several multiple-perp terrorist attacks on schools then academia will be ready to study (peer reviewed, of course) the merits of long guns on campus; not before. The shift from concealed handguns to long guns will occur within hours in the southern and western States.
          First things first. No need to frighten the hoplophobes prematurely.

        2. avatar Brett says:

          At least you would have the option of using your handgun to fight your way to a long gun.

      2. avatar John in Ohio says:

        But, it’s obscene to disarm even that one victim. Disarming the individual drops that individual’s chances of survival. That chance might look slim and therefore unimportant from a distance but any chance sure as hell is important to that victim at the time.

      3. avatar ThomasR says:

        True. But if the choice is one of being shot down like a dog, or taking even one of those cowards with me, I know which choice I would make.

        Also, from what I have seen in other scenarios, the terrorists split up and go alone in different areas to maximize deaths, so you might get lucky and be dealing with only one killer.

      1. avatar Taylor TX says:

        Time for a fluidic space ass whoopin 🙂

    2. avatar Shire-man says:

      Having gun when needed on site = worse.
      Calling somebody to bring guns to the site after the need has passed = better.

      Makes perfect sense if you’re a totalitarian globalist who hates the 7 billion peons who are breathing your air.

    3. avatar arsh says:

      I agree. I always think back to 9/11. People (with the exception of one flight) just did what they were told and died anyway. The way I see it when you’re held hostage you’re a dead man walking, so you can go out crying or you can go out guns blazing.

  4. avatar SD3 says:

    It was those friggin’ Jehovas Witnesses, wasn’t it?

  5. avatar Nickbnumbers says:

    sounds like those terrorists “just snapped.”

    They could have had a meaningful conversation with the students at the university if they weren’t such paranoid white guys compensating for something.

    I hope they at least gave them a trigger warning.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      You left out the part that the attackers purchased their rifles at a gun show without background checks … from “private” sellers who got special incentives from the eeevil gun manufacturers who only care about profits. Oh, and you also left out the part about how local government wasn’t going to allow the gun show until the National Rifle Association beat down the local government into compliance.

      /end_sarcasm

      1. avatar JWM says:

        I believe they bought those rifles straight from the NRA, via the internet, at a very heavy discount once the NRA found out they were gonna do a school shooting with them. And shannon and co. will add this to the list of US school shootings.

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Niiiiice! I like it.

        2. avatar MarkPA says:

          What would academia think if they knew about the CMP? Battle rifles you say? Mail-order?

  6. avatar Shannon's Pimp says:

    Kenya, oh the irony…

  7. avatar Red in Texas says:

    Yeah, but this could, and will never happen here. Islamic terrorists don’t exist, just ask our government.

  8. avatar ThomasR says:

    Just look at the FBI terrorism report. They mention as one group of potential terrorists as US military veterans, but no mention of possible muslim based attacks.

    Politically Correct. The brainwashing to believe that if you acknowledge the reality and facts of the world, you are an intolerant, bigoted and hateful person.

    Politically Correct. The brainwashing to become the clinical definition of being insane.

    1. avatar Yellow Devil says:

      “Political Correctness is merely a polite form of tyranny.” -Charlton Heston, Actor and Civil Rights Activist

  9. avatar gsnyder says:

    I’d much rather risk the unusual threat of a lawful gun carrying person going bad than having no defense what-so-ever against an armed maniac.

  10. avatar IdahoPete says:

    See, this is what our liberal college presidents and faculty profs warned us about here in Idaho when we passed our concealed carry on campus” bill last year – it must have been all the “drunken frat boys with guns” that did this killing in Kenya, right? Maybe they forgot to put up enough “gun free zone” signs.

  11. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Am I the only one commenting to be sorry for the loss of life? I see no humor in 3rd world slaughter…

    1. avatar IdahoPete says:

      Not humor – recognition of the irony involved. Gun-free zone in an anti-gun country equals slaughter of the unarmed innocents. This kind of killing is almost guaranteed by a government that cannot trust its citizens with arms.

  12. avatar foodog says:

    Religion of Pieces™ again?

    1. avatar Former Water Walker says:

      Allah for the win!

  13. avatar Tom Stelene says:

    This headline sounds like anti-gun propaganda. What would these ‘gunmen’ have to do to be called ‘terrorists’ instead? – which is what I would call them.

  14. avatar Dustin says:

    But that’s illegal! How can it be!? There’s a law that says no…

  15. avatar Dustin says:

    “If one of the students or teachers had a gun, it would just make it worse.”

    What? How?

    I believe that a person who says such exceptionally stupid things should no longer be considered a person. Dispose of your humanity, you don’t get to be a human anymore.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email