Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Tue Mar 02 11:26:24 PST 2021

Utopia Talk / Politics / Shooting and bomb explosion
Paramount
Member
Tue Feb 09 12:37:36
Gunfire at clinic in Wright County leaves several seriously wounded

A bomb exploded about 30 minutes later at the clinic, according to emergency dispatch audio.

Gunfire erupted at a health clinic in Wright County late Tuesday morning, and at least five people were reported to be wounded.

The scene is the Allina Health Clinic in Buffalo on Crossroads Campus Drive, according to police, who were called there about 10:55 a.m.

Up to five people are said to be wounded, and a male suspect has been detained, according to emergency dispatch audio.

Three people were taken by ambulance to North Memorial Health Hospital in Robbinsdale, which is equipped to handle the most severe of critical incident injuries, while two were taken to Allina-operated Buffalo Hospital, emergency medical personnel were heard saying on dispatch audio.

About 30 minutes later, a bomb went off in the family medicine and urgent care clinic, the dispatch audio revealed. That explosion forced emergency medical personnel to leave the clinic parking lot and set up farther away, the audio continued.

A spokesman for the full Allina Health system was heading to the scene early Tuesday afternoon to assess the situation and possibly disclose further details.

There also is a "high suspicion" of a bomb threat directed at a Super 8 hotel about a mile south of the clinic, the dispatch audio disclosed, but its relationship to the shooting was not immediately clear.

Authorities have since imposed a flight ban over the area, according to the dispatch audio.

http://www...l-seriously-wounded/600020966/


What could be the motive here?

Anti-vaxxers? Anti-abortionists? Anti-healthers?
General Populace
Member
Tue Feb 09 12:40:07
Let the revolution begin!!........ Again.
Sam Adams
Member
Tue Feb 09 13:10:11
Disgruntled employee or ex husband usually
obaminated
Member
Tue Feb 09 14:10:24
Possibly disgruntled employee, gotta find out what exactly these bombs are. An actual bomb would take time and expertise to make which would rule out a pissed off coworker.
mexicantardnado
Member
Tue Feb 09 14:14:03
"An actual bomb would take time and expertise to make which would rule out a pissed off coworker."

And how exactly would that rule out a pissed off coworker, retard? Let's hear your theories on this.

For instance; how hard would it be for a person with "time", let's say a coworker, who is disgruntled. Take the time to research on how to make a bomb, where would he get this resource of information? Oh, yeah, the internet, so, they take the time to do all of this, and then with that, was able to make a bomb.

But, with your retarded logic, "can't be coworker, because time and expertise."

Seriously, retard?

http://www...e-and-hard-to-trace-1521624601

You're so fucking retarded.
mexicantardnado
Member
Tue Feb 09 14:19:44
"Experts say it isn’t difficult to buy necessary materials to construct device" ROFL!

But retard says...

"An actual bomb would take time and expertise to make which would rule out a pissed off coworker."

So, so retarded.
Paramount
Member
Tue Feb 09 14:47:55
Maybe it was a pro-vaxxer who got tired of waiting to be vaccinated?
Seb
Member
Wed Feb 10 07:54:42
Mexican:

"Buy", not "make"

Sure, someone with time can probably learn how to build a device.

But it's relatively hard to research, give the techniques and build and test a successful device.

Amateurs tend to get caught between intent and execution, at least for moderately sophisticated devices or have a failed bomb.

Of course it doesn't preclude an angry co-worker, but obviously the more sophisticated the device, the narrower the list of potential suspects become. Anyone can make a pipe bomb with a lit fuse.

A timed device etc that works first time from someone with no prior skills in electronics or chemistry isn't impossible, but it's more than likely to either not work, or the maker injur themselves in the process.

Unless Disgruntled co-worker happened to have thesec skills, should it be a more sophisticated bomb, I would think they would have looked at other methods.

So a sophisticated device tends to suggest a wider pool in terms of motive.

mexicantardnado
Member
Wed Feb 10 10:15:19
Seb,

"construct = make"

GG.
Seb
Member
Wed Feb 10 10:46:38
Mexican:

Go and read your post Tue Feb 09 14:19:44

"Experts say it isn’t difficult to buy necessary materials to construct device"

You are juxtaposing this to obaminateds claim an "actual"* bomb takes expertise.

But your quote refers to buying the parts, not making or constructing.

It's not difficult to buy the parts. While can order a list of electronic parts and explosive precursors on the internet.

Turning that into a bomb that actually works first time, without being caught or injuring yourself - that's the hard part.


* Whatever that means - see my post for a more nuanced position.

GG indeed.


mexicantardnado
Member
Wed Feb 10 10:53:37
Sebtard,

I am sure that it would take you less than a second to click on the link, as that is what the title of the article is. While the article in itself describes that the construction, to make, a device, while also buying the materials is not as difficult as it was implied or declared by the retard.

Now, we have you, attempting to play semantics based upon a title of an article, where it is crystal clear the claim that mtard made was that, 'it couldn't be a coworker, because they wouldn't have the expertise to build a bomb'

Any more retarded logic you want to apply?

Again, gg.
mexicantardnado
Member
Wed Feb 10 10:58:59
Oh, allow me to rephrase, so that you won't get to confused.

Title: Why Homemade Bombs Are Easy to Make and Hard to Trace

subheading: Experts say it isn’t difficult to buy necessary materials to construct device.

Article: describes that it doesn't take a rocket scientist to make a bomb.


Sebtard and mtard; "you've got to have a phd to do this."

No one is disputing that a degree of intelligence is needed. But to outright declare that it takes an "expert" is wrong.

Which goes against the circular logic by mtard's initial post:

"Possibly disgruntled employee, gotta find out what exactly these bombs are. An actual bomb would take time and expertise to make which would rule out a pissed off coworker."

So, he starts off staying its a disgruntled employee, but concludes it can't be.

mexicantardnado
Member
Wed Feb 10 11:10:35
And to summarize:

Mtard's claim. Disgruntled employee aka a coworker, possible bombmaker but no time or expertise, therefore cannot be bomb maker because they do not have time or expertise.

Troll's counter; Not hard to research and have the time to research and construct.

*finds article and submits supporting point*

Sebtard: 'semantics, it means only to buy because it says buy not make' *doesn't read article, gets lost like biden, no one can help him now*
Seb
Member
Wed Feb 10 15:03:17
Mexican:

Is there anything in the article which fundamentally disagrees with what I said?

No.

Are you just getting but hurt because you didn't read your own quote?

Yes.

Calm down dear, your reputation isn't going to suffer from this.
Mexicantardnado
Member
Thu Feb 11 11:21:05
"Is there anything in the article which fundamentally disagrees with what I said?"


"But it's relatively hard to research, give the techniques and build and test a successful device" -sebtard.

Simple answer, yes. Yes, there was something that fundamentally disagrees with what you said.

"Are you just getting but hurt because you didn't read your own quote?"

No. The excerpt from the article is applicable to retard's claim. Along with the entire article itself.

"Calm down dear, your reputation isn't going to suffer from this."

Continue to perpetuate your incapacity to understanding simple logic.

Seb
Member
Thu Feb 11 11:31:50
Mexicantornado:

What do you think relatively hard means?

Do you think it's harder and more likely to result in an in injury along the way compared to buying a gun, and walking up to the front door?

"The excerpt from the article is applicable to retard's claim"
The excerpt you posted referred specifically to buying the materials, not manufacture. If you think the excerpt you posted is relevant, you have sub-normal reading comprehension.

"Continue to perpetuate your incapacity to understanding simple logic"
We aren't disagreeing about logic. We are disagreeing about the meaning of words.

Evidently you don't understand the words relatively, and you don't understand the difference between "buy" and "make".

Seb
Member
Thu Feb 11 11:32:53
Bottom line, next time, quote the bit from an article that supports your point, not the bit that doesn't.
Mexicantardnado
Member
Thu Feb 11 11:37:33
Ah yes, the continuation if the semantically, subjective argumentation, because a word does not fit your concept. *yawn*
Mexicantardnado
Member
Thu Feb 11 11:37:49
Of*
Seb
Member
Thu Feb 11 15:24:28
Is that supposed to be English?
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share