Many Killed in Attack in Nice

[ryzno]

I'd like to see the refrigeration unit for the cargo area of the truck.
I only know about Euro trucks from the game, but don't they also have the unit at the top front end of the cargo area/trailer?
There's no unit. Also why such a large truck for so little ice cream?
The police stopped him and screwed up, period.

 

[mustafur]

Please do explain why no one is saying we need to ban killer trucks? I mean it is as much as a weapon as the rifle that was used in the gay club no? But then the attention was shifted to gun control instead of the radical Islamist that pulled the trigger.

See the point @Michael88 is making here?

To be fair you don't often see a truck being the weapon of choice for Murder compared to the worlds most picked option on the other hand.

 

[fumunaplz]

How about bombs left in trucks?

 

[mister dog]

I'd like to see the refrigeration unit for the cargo area of the truck.
I only know about Euro trucks from the game, but don't they also have the unit at the top front end of the cargo area/trailer?
There's no unit. Also why such a large truck for so little ice cream?
The police stopped him and screwed up, period.

Yes they do. It's normally a box at the top of a cabin, like this:

This is the cargo area of the Nice truck:

And the front:

 

[Milouse]

his non refrigerated truck

Fine, but it has been considered as refrigerated in the first place by almost everyone, proof that the difference between a refrigerated and a non-refrigerated non-opened truck is not obvious at all for non-specialists.

Furthermore, i've checked on my side and this" ice-cream answer to the police" story is still without an identified sourced. Le Monde as tagged it as internet rumor after investigating the subject. Prosecutor didn't mention such thing yesterday.

 

[mirial]

Hurry, hurry, call the police !
mirial: "There is a truck driver... driving a... a... truck!"

This should have been an easy check. You, like us, were meant to be on high alert for crying out loud. This truck was stationary for several hours on the promenade before the attack and the man was allegedly questioned by police....no one alerted them it seems. Your sarcasm is as arrogant as your lack of suspicion.

 

[Milouse]

Your sarcasm is as arrogant as your lack of suspicion.

The sarcasm had a point.
I guess you'd find me arrogant if i raise an eyebrow reading that an alleged lack of suspicion could be arrogance, and even worse if i turn this into another sarcasm.
Anyway...

This should have been an easy check.

You are highly presumptuous to draw such conclusions.
You weren't on site.
The two cops in front of me at the Paris firework were constantly solicited by crowd and circulation problems.
We have no information about the circumstances of this truck check, nor confirmation (yet?) that this situation existed at all.

 

[TenEightyOne]

This should have been an easy check. You, like us, were meant to be on high alert for crying out loud. This truck was stationary for several hours on the promenade before the attack and the man was allegedly questioned by police....no one alerted them it seems.

A stationary truck? It's so obvious now that you point it out.

Until the police are authorised to use nascent telepathy it's going to be impossible to read the minds of attackers.

 

[Michael88]

The issue seems to be that no one thought to use a vehicle as a weapon until some highly imaginative radical (can't remember his name) inspired those to use anything at their disposal to kill, including vehicles.

The names Osama, that guy that made people crash planes into buildings killing 5000+.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Has anyone considered the reason WHY the truck was used as a weapon (outside of Islamic Extremism inspirations?) The pretty simple answer is that the driver was going to make the attack a lot worse than it did had those weapons in the back were real. He could have walked through the middle of Nice and blew himself up like other homicide bombers, but he didn't. He used a truck. Why?

 

[LeMansAid]

@Milouse The truck vs gun argument can go in one of two directions, and I think that most advocates for gun freedom would endorse the opposite direction to what you have presented (accounting for the sarcasm). You've mused a hypothetical where trucks are treated equal to guns, in the sense of the item/tool being dangerous, and a risk. The other direction (which I'm sure was @Michael88's point) would have guns and trucks treated equally, but in the direction of neither being a risk by default, and only dangerous when used incorrectly or with malice. If we follow that direction all the way to the end, and eliminate blaming any item or tool where harm only comes from misuse, we can switch entirely to a different plain to judge risk. That plain would be the judgement of people. Granted, you'd probably still disagree with @mister dog on where the pivot point should be on that plain, but you'd at least be arguing not under false pretences.

 

[Zenith]

You are not very smart, are you?

Irony alert.

Ad hominem, nice.

When gun control advocates use a tragedy to push legislation (as they do, every time), it's sold as responsible lobbying. When the tables are turned suddenly he's the sick one.

Michael, like all gun owners across the world, has to deal with bleeding hearts telling him that he's responsible every time some loon with a gun shoots up a crowded place. He's had discussions with these people ad nauseam about how there are plenty of other viable weapons to kill people with like bombs, knives, and trucks and that gun control cannot save lives. We've had these discussions on this board with people who have a lot more intelligent things to say than you two.

Well, this time the loon used a truck. And he killed more people than any of the shootings with a gun in the US. Obviously somebody's hypothesis here is wrong. The smart thing to do in this case is adjust your argument, the dumb thing to do is call people names.

 

[UKMikey]

Ad hominem, not. I'm not using a tragedy to push a political agenda while accusing other people of doing the same thing, nor have I called anyone names. And to point that out on "this board" in a two word post is not a bleeding heart attack on the world's gun control advocates.

 

[Dennisch]

A stationary truck? It's so obvious now that you point it out.

Until the police are authorised to use nascent telepathy it's going to be impossible to read the minds of attackers.

For what it's worth, French intelligence services heard rumours about a truck being used as a weapon, they just didn't know a location.

They did however fails massively by not securing the promenade properly. The entire country was and is on high alert. On a day like Bastille day they should have known something could happen, with the amount of people that gathered throughout France.

They can secure all those squares during the EC. They apparently can secure most, if not all, places during the Tour de France.

Security forces failed.

 

[Milouse]

For what it's worth, French intelligence services heard rumours about a truck being used as a weapon

YOU heard a rumor.
This story comes from DGSI (Internal Security) director public analysis, predicting that the attacks would evolve in order to keep the attackers alive, by using, for example, explosive trucks. (which could have been in the truck)

The entire country was and is on high alert.

Which is normal state since more than a year.

They can secure all those squares during the EC. They apparently can secure most, if not all, places during the Tour de France.

Tour de France is at only one place at once. Bastille Day consist of thousands of gatherings around fireworks across the country.

Security forces failed.

Obviously "they" did. Pointless statement.
Law of diminishing returns applies to security measures too: as you can only reduce the risk, an event doesn't prove anything, especially since it comes from an unusual drinking and gay neo-Jihadist.

 

[Dennisch]

This story comes from DGSI (Internal Security) director public analysis, predicting that the attacks would evolve in order to keep the attackers alive, by using, for example, explosive trucks. (which could have been in the truck)

Then you make sure security is up to the task. It wasn't.

Which is normal state since more than a year.

Doesn't matter.

Tour de France is at only one place at once. Bastille Day consist of thousands of gatherings around fireworks across the country.

The average stage of the Tour is 150-200km long. Yet you see military and police dotted along the course.

Obviously "they" did. Pointless statement.
Law of diminishing returns applies to security measures too: as you can only reduce the risk, an event doesn't prove anything,

You minimise the risk by doing the utmost possible. Especially at places where thousands of people gather. If they can safely protect 10 of thousands throughout the country during big events, why did they failed to do it in Nice?

 

[Zenith]

Ad hominem, not. I'm not using a tragedy to push a political agenda while accusing other people of doing the same thing, nor have I called anyone names. And to point that out on "this board" in a two word post is not a bleeding heart attack on the world's gun control advocates.

Political change is driven by events such as this. Mourning is a part of the process but mourning doesn't prevent these things from happening again. Policy changes can. In order to achieve that political agendas must be pushed.

Don't get salty when someone posts a discussion topic to a discussion board. This isn't Facebook.

 

[mirial]

Until the police are authorised to use nascent telepathy it's going to be impossible to read the minds of attackers.

Given the sheer numbers of those of North African origin living along the Riviera and the research that @mister dog provided, then yes, that is what will be required.

 

[MatskiMonk]

GTP Pew-pew club taking the opportunity to get snarky in a "killing" thread that wasn't to do with guns.. classy.

 

[Dennisch]

that wasn't to do with guns.

*no pew.

 

[Zenith]

GTP Pew-pew club taking the opportunity to get snarky in a "killing" thread that wasn't to do with guns.. classy.

This incident is part of a greater story revolving around religious extremism and attacks on the general public. It's related to guns, trucks, public safety, immigration, and Islamic terror.

Would a gun discussion be more relevant in the Guns thread? Probably, but that hasn't stopped people from making gun control arguments in threads like this before. As I said, why is it suddenly a problem when it's a pro gun rights person who does it?

classy

Because GTP's OCE board is where people come to reach out with sympathy and support for the victims of a tragedy.

 

[Danoff]

GTP Pew-pew club taking the opportunity to get snarky in a "killing" thread that wasn't to do with guns.. classy.

I assume you take the same position when people politicize a thread about a tragedy that did involve guns. I assume you attacked the class of everyone that blamed guns for every tragedy discussed here. Let me check your posts in the Orlando shooting thread... nope, nothing attacking anyone's class for politicizing that event. Let me check the San Bernardino thread... nope, in that one you mildly criticized me for arguing that information is at least needed before turning it political.

I'm all for holding back the politicking until a) the incident is at least over (which the San Bernardino thread didn't manage), b) we at least know the facts about the incident, and c) emotions (at least of those not involved) have had a chance to calm down so that we can have a real discussion. But If you're going to rail against politicizing a tragedy, maybe do it evenhandedly.

 

[Milouse]

If they can safely protect 10 of thousands throughout the country during big events, why did they failed to do it in Nice?

1. Nice attack happened during a moment where all police forces were diluted across the whole country. So, yes, it was a big day that needed max of awareness, but by far the most difficult to handle for security.
2. You're either trying to mislead others (we have a few good clients here), or doing a reasoning error: you are ranking two security quality by comparing two discrete events, one which had to deal with an attack, the other not. You could use that logic if an attack would occurs on every security weakness, which would be ludicrous to consider with such rare occurrences, statistically speaking.

And it DOES matter when an alert is permanent, because it slips back to a non-alert state of mind sooner or later.

 

[MatskiMonk]

I assume you take the same position when people politicize a thread about a tragedy that did involve guns. I assume you attacked the class of everyone that blamed guns for every tragedy discussed here.

In events where people are shot, I think it's reasonable to discuss legislation around guns. In threads where people are hit with a truck, I don't think it's relevant for gun fans to play the victim card. It's a simple as that.

 

[Sanji Himura]

In events where people are shot, I think it's reasonable to discuss legislation around guns. In threads where people are hit with a truck, I don't think it's relevant for gun fans to play the victim card. It's a simple as that.

But guns were involved in Nice. It wasn't publicized (at least in the US anyway) since the gun used didn't resemble anything like an AR-15.

 

[mister dog]

I'm actually anti guns. Again the whole point of bringing the gun debate into this discussion is to demonstrate that liberals gladly use it as the scapegoat for an extremist Islamic attack when the opportunity arises, but don't extend the same courtesy to 'killer trucks' when another extremist Islamic attack happens.

So yes it's the mental thought process and inspiration that is the danger here and which should be the focal point of the blame, and not so much the tools used in these hideous acts.

 

[Danoff]

In events where people are shot, I think it's reasonable to discuss legislation around guns. In threads where people are hit with a truck, I don't think it's relevant for gun fans to play the victim card. It's a simple as that.

Hypocrisy is hypocritical.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Hypocrisy is hypocritical.

?

A thread about a shooting => debate about guns = "bleeding hearts"
A thread not about a shooting => no debate about guns = "hypocrisy"

Glad that's been cleared up.

 

[Johnnypenso]

?

A thread about a shooting => debate about guns = "bleeding hearts"
A thread not about a shooting => no debate about guns = "hypocrisy"

Glad that's been cleared up.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/15/europe/nice-france-truck/

But as the last firework fizzled, gunfire rang out -- authorities and witnesses say the driver shot from the cab of the truck -- and the truck accelerated down the crowded street.
Bouhlel began the attack at about 10:45 p.m., driving the truck into people, Molins said. At one point, he fired a gun several times at three police officers close to a hotel, the prosecutor explained said.

After Bouhlel was shot, police found a handgun and some ammunition in the truck's cab, as well as a replica handgun, two replica assault rifles, a cell phone and various documents, Molins said. In the trailer was the bicycle and some empty pallets.

 

[Danoff]

?

A thread about a shooting => debate about guns = "bleeding hearts"
A thread not about a shooting => no debate about guns = "hypocrisy"

Glad that's been cleared up.

A thread about violence => Political implications = perfectly reasonable
A thread about violence => Political implications = not reasonable at all

Hypocrisy