No Picture

Texas Discussion, News and Weather • Re: Is Austin gun friendly?

August 13, 2017 Photon Guy 0
Offnrunnen_53 wrote:
No it is not gun friendly… Austin is very blue & liberal. Although Texas is an open carry state Austin’s people are very different and liberally out spoken.

If somebody has a license to carry in Texas than it would cover all of Texas including Austin. Its too bad if Austin is not gun friendly because I really liked Austin when I was there. Although Im technically a Republican there are some liberal causes I believe very strongly in although obviously not their anti gun cause.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Sun Aug 13, 2017 12:44 pm


No Picture

Texas Discussion, News and Weather • Re: Is Austin gun friendly?

August 13, 2017 Photon Guy 0
Offnrunnen_53 wrote:
No it is not gun friendly… Austin is very blue & liberal. Although Texas is an open carry state Austin’s people are very different and liberally out spoken.

If somebody has a license to carry in Texas than it would cover all of Texas including Austin. Its too bad if Austin is not gun friendly because I really liked Austin when I was there. Although Im technically a Republican there are some liberal causes I believe very strongly in although obviously not their anti gun cause.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Sun Aug 13, 2017 12:44 pm


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: EMP-Korea Concerns & Discussions #5 (Aug 2017)

August 12, 2017 Photon Guy 0

The way I see it, as of now NK might be even more dangerous than the USSR during the cold war. At least Gorbachev was reasonable and wanted to work with the USA to make peace, Kim Jung Un on the other hand is a complete nutcase! Supposedly his army is “capable of fighting any war the U.S. wants” and he seems to be absolutely ruthless and he doesn’t care what happens to NK as long as lands a blow on the USA.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Sat Aug 12, 2017 4:15 pm


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: EMP-Korea Concerns & Discussions #5 (Aug 2017)

August 12, 2017 Photon Guy 0

The way I see it, as of now NK might be even more dangerous than the USSR during the cold war. At least Gorbachev was reasonable and wanted to work with the USA to make peace, Kim Jung Un on the other hand is a complete nutcase! Supposedly his army is “capable of fighting any war the U.S. wants” and he seems to be absolutely ruthless and he doesn’t care what happens to NK as long as lands a blow on the USA.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Sat Aug 12, 2017 4:15 pm


No Picture

The Survival Mom Forum Discussions • Re: List of important papers to have when SHTF ?

August 11, 2017 Photon Guy 0

Here are some of the documents I consider important in such a situation
Driver’s License
Passport
Birth Certificate
Social Security Card
Properts Deeds
Any other types of permits (carry permits, vehicle permits, ect.)

As such it would be a good idea to make photo copies of all of the above and to store the copies somewhere safe.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:36 am


No Picture

The Survival Mom Forum Discussions • Re: List of important papers to have when SHTF ?

August 11, 2017 Photon Guy 0

Here are some of the documents I consider important in such a situation
Driver’s License
Passport
Birth Certificate
Social Security Card
Properts Deeds
Any other types of permits (carry permits, vehicle permits, ect.)

As such it would be a good idea to make photo copies of all of the above and to store the copies somewhere safe.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:36 am


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: EMP-Korea Concerns & Discussions #5 (Aug 2017)

August 9, 2017 Photon Guy 0

I am mostly concerned about an EMP strike that could wipe out the entire electrical grid in the USA. Theoretically North Korea could detonate a small atomic bomb high over Kansas which could potentially knock out the whole grid and it could take as long as a year to get it back up and running. Supposedly it would take only a small atomic bomb to do that and due to its small size and the fact that it would be detonated at such high altitude it would be hard to detect before it goes off. Being without electricity for an entire year is disastrous enough but my main concern is that immediately after such an EMP strike that NK could then launch a full scale nuclear assault against the USA and the USA would not be able to strike back due to the electricity being down.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:23 pm


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: EMP-Korea Concerns & Discussions #5 (Aug 2017)

August 9, 2017 Photon Guy 0

I am mostly concerned about an EMP strike that could wipe out the entire electrical grid in the USA. Theoretically North Korea could detonate a small atomic bomb high over Kansas which could potentially knock out the whole grid and it could take as long as a year to get it back up and running. Supposedly it would take only a small atomic bomb to do that and due to its small size and the fact that it would be detonated at such high altitude it would be hard to detect before it goes off. Being without electricity for an entire year is disastrous enough but my main concern is that immediately after such an EMP strike that NK could then launch a full scale nuclear assault against the USA and the USA would not be able to strike back due to the electricity being down.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:23 pm


No Picture

General Food Topics • Electric vs Gas Operated Stoves and Ovens

July 29, 2017 Photon Guy 0

For stoves, ovens, and other machines for cooking food Im weighing the advantages and disadvantages of electrical vs gas operated. I used to have an electric stove but it has since been replaced with a gas operated stove. Im thinking that having it gas operated has the advantages of being able to reach higher temperatures and having greater temperature control but electricity has the advantage in that its power source is much easier to come by. If there’s a gas shortage which could be very likely in a SHTF event and you’re not able to get gas than your gas operated cooking appliances will be useless. On the other hand it would be much easier to get electricity than it would be to get gas in a crisis. Even if the power is knocked out you could have generators, backup batteries, and of course solar power which provided you can get sunlight can get you electricity even after you have no more gas for your generators and your backup batteries all run dry. So those are what I see as the advantages and disadvantages of having gas vs electricity when it comes to cooking.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Fri Jul 28, 2017 7:28 pm


No Picture

General Food Topics • Electric vs Gas Operated Stoves and Ovens

July 29, 2017 Photon Guy 0

For stoves, ovens, and other machines for cooking food Im weighing the advantages and disadvantages of electrical vs gas operated. I used to have an electric stove but it has since been replaced with a gas operated stove. Im thinking that having it gas operated has the advantages of being able to reach higher temperatures and having greater temperature control but electricity has the advantage in that its power source is much easier to come by. If there’s a gas shortage which could be very likely in a SHTF event and you’re not able to get gas than your gas operated cooking appliances will be useless. On the other hand it would be much easier to get electricity than it would be to get gas in a crisis. Even if the power is knocked out you could have generators, backup batteries, and of course solar power which provided you can get sunlight can get you electricity even after you have no more gas for your generators and your backup batteries all run dry. So those are what I see as the advantages and disadvantages of having gas vs electricity when it comes to cooking.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Fri Jul 28, 2017 7:28 pm


No Picture

General Food Topics • Electric vs Gas Operated Stoves and Ovens

July 29, 2017 Photon Guy 0

For stoves, ovens, and other machines for cooking food Im weighing the advantages and disadvantages of electrical vs gas operated. I used to have an electric stove but it has since been replaced with a gas operated stove. Im thinking that having it gas operated has the advantages of being able to reach higher temperatures and having greater temperature control but electricity has the advantage in that its power source is much easier to come by. If there’s a gas shortage which could be very likely in a SHTF event and you’re not able to get gas than your gas operated cooking appliances will be useless. On the other hand it would be much easier to get electricity than it would be to get gas in a crisis. Even if the power is knocked out you could have generators, backup batteries, and of course solar power which provided you can get sunlight can get you electricity even after you have no more gas for your generators and your backup batteries all run dry. So those are what I see as the advantages and disadvantages of having gas vs electricity when it comes to cooking.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Fri Jul 28, 2017 7:28 pm


No Picture

A.N.T.S. • Re: Doing Number 2

July 12, 2017 Photon Guy 0
Cadit wrote:
LOL: Ok, we all know that there are times that we need to Relieve ourselves as nature must be obeyed. What’s your thoughts on how you will manage this natural problem. Some people think that because animals crap in the woods they can to. Well it was done that way back in the 1800 and before, put today, it would be a very bad ideal for say 300 million to start following nature and dropping their waste in the woods.

For those times where I need be sanitary at my location, say my home if I haven’t bugged out. I would do the plastic liner in the bowl and use cat litter. I also have a bucket with a lid. for on the move. If I had a bug out location, I would build a outhouse. That’s what we had growing up, and a cast-iron tub for bathing on the back porch.

So what is your solution? What are your plans, share them. It may help someone who hasn’t gotten that far yet.

Years back, I took a two week survival class out in the woods. We were in the wilderness in Utah with just the clothes on our backs, a knife, a cup for gathering water, and sometimes we would have water bottles and be carrying blanket packs, the blankets we used for sleeping we would tie them into backpacks where we would sometimes carry extra gear such as liquid AO which we used for purifying water for drinking. We learned how to find food and water, we were taught what we could eat in the woods and sometimes food and water was provided such as fruits and we did at one point kill, cook, and eat a sheep. Certainly we didn’t have any plumbing or toilets or even toilet paper for the two weeks we were in the woods.

So anyway, one of the first things we were instructed on was how to take a dump in the woods. You find a place where you’ve got privacy and then you simply drop your pants and squat and do your business. You then use sand to clean your butt crack. This was out in the desert in Utah so sand was very plentiful. After that you would use sand and sage to clean your hands. Sage is a plant that is very antiseptic and works just about as well as soap and it is also very plentiful out in the woods in Utah. So that’s how we would do a deuce in the woods.

BTW they did have plumbing in the 1800s, and they had flush toilets and showers.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Wed Jul 12, 2017 2:26 pm


No Picture

Guns • Re: Where I learn to shoot

July 11, 2017 Photon Guy 0
PatrioticStabilist wrote:
We have a new shooting range that was set up in a near by city. I hope to get up there
and learn more and get some good shooting skills. I have the guns, do not have the
expertise, only the most basic.

So does the range offer instruction? If you want to develop more skill and expertise I would highly recommend going to a shooting school.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Tue Jul 11, 2017 10:01 am


No Picture

Introduce Yourself • Re: New member from IL soon to be TN

June 21, 2017 Photon Guy 0

Nice to have you aboard! Enjoy the gun lessons. You will probably get much more of an opportunity for that in TN as from what I know they are much more gun friendly than IL. I go to TN from time to time, often in the Nashville area. Bought a rifle in TN at the Bass Pro in Nashville. Had to get a souvenir.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:14 pm


No Picture

Introduce Yourself • Re: New member from IL soon to be TN

June 21, 2017 Photon Guy 0

Nice to have you aboard! Enjoy the gun lessons. You will probably get much more of an opportunity for that in TN as from what I know they are much more gun friendly than IL. I go to TN from time to time, often in the Nashville area. Bought a rifle in TN at the Bass Pro in Nashville. Had to get a souvenir.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:14 pm


Image

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: Another terror attack in the UK

June 14, 2017 Photon Guy 0
BK in KC wrote:
Luke 22:36
He said to them , “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.”

The pacifists will say that he was having them carry swords so that the Romans would think Jesus was leading an armed revolt and thus they would arrest Him and ultimately crucify Him so that He could fulfill prophecy. Also, its been mentioned that Jesus had them carry swords since he knew one of them, namely Peter, would use their sword and He would then point out that its not the proper way as He rebukes Peter and tells him that he who takes the sword will perish by the sword.

BK in KC wrote:
Matthew 10:34
“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth, but a sword.”

That has to do with spiritual warfare not physical warfare.

BK in KC wrote:
And don’t forget His rage at the Temple Mount

Image

There is no indication that Jesus assaulted anybody in that incident. The Bible says He did get out a whip but the whip could’ve just been used to drive out the animals and not used against people. He did overturn the tables and He did create quite a scene but there is no guarantee that He assaulted the moneychangers or anybody else.

These are the arguments the pacifists will use. They’ve been challenged by these points and they have their own counter arguments against them. Im not saying I agree with them, Im just saying that this is the position they take and this is what they will often say when challenged with these verses.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Wed Jun 14, 2017 4:48 pm


Image

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: Another terror attack in the UK

June 14, 2017 Photon Guy 0
BK in KC wrote:
Luke 22:36
He said to them , “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.”

The pacifists will say that he was having them carry swords so that the Romans would think Jesus was leading an armed revolt and thus they would arrest Him and ultimately crucify Him so that He could fulfill prophecy. Also, its been mentioned that Jesus had them carry swords since he knew one of them, namely Peter, would use their sword and He would then point out that its not the proper way as He rebukes Peter and tells him that he who takes the sword will perish by the sword.

BK in KC wrote:
Matthew 10:34
“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth, but a sword.”

That has to do with spiritual warfare not physical warfare.

BK in KC wrote:
And don’t forget His rage at the Temple Mount

Image

There is no indication that Jesus assaulted anybody in that incident. The Bible says He did get out a whip but the whip could’ve just been used to drive out the animals and not used against people. He did overturn the tables and He did create quite a scene but there is no guarantee that He assaulted the moneychangers or anybody else.

These are the arguments the pacifists will use. They’ve been challenged by these points and they have their own counter arguments against them. Im not saying I agree with them, Im just saying that this is the position they take and this is what they will often say when challenged with these verses.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Wed Jun 14, 2017 4:48 pm


Image

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: Another terror attack in the UK

June 14, 2017 Photon Guy 0
BK in KC wrote:
Luke 22:36
He said to them , “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.”

The pacifists will say that he was having them carry swords so that the Romans would think Jesus was leading an armed revolt and thus they would arrest Him and ultimately crucify Him so that He could fulfill prophecy. Also, its been mentioned that Jesus had them carry swords since he knew one of them, namely Peter, would use their sword and He would then point out that its not the proper way as He rebukes Peter and tells him that he who takes the sword will perish by the sword.

BK in KC wrote:
Matthew 10:34
“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth, but a sword.”

That has to do with spiritual warfare not physical warfare.

BK in KC wrote:
And don’t forget His rage at the Temple Mount

Image

There is no indication that Jesus assaulted anybody in that incident. The Bible says He did get out a whip but the whip could’ve just been used to drive out the animals and not used against people. He did overturn the tables and He did create quite a scene but there is no guarantee that He assaulted the moneychangers or anybody else.

These are the arguments the pacifists will use. They’ve been challenged by these points and they have their own counter arguments against them. Im not saying I agree with them, Im just saying that this is the position they take and this is what they will often say when challenged with these verses.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Wed Jun 14, 2017 4:48 pm


Image

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: Another terror attack in the UK

June 13, 2017 Photon Guy 0
daaswampman wrote:
I get where your coming from, but as I said: they need to read their Bible. It is much more than a few versus taken out of context from the New Testament or listening to a few Sunday Sermons! I am sure they will not fight back and that is fine. If they had studied and knew their Bible, they would know what to expect and what was expected of them! Swamp

Can you find any case of Jesus ever using or condoning violence? Can you mention any time in the New Testament when violence was used without the user being told its not the proper way? That’s what the pacifists will say.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Tue Jun 13, 2017 8:47 am


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: Another terror attack in the UK

June 13, 2017 Photon Guy 0
daaswampman wrote:
I get where your coming from, but as I said: they need to read their Bible. It is much more than a few versus taken out of context from the New Testament or listening to a few Sunday Sermons! I am sure they will not fight back and that is fine. If they had studied and knew their Bible, they would know what to expect and what was expected of them! Swamp

Can you find any case of Jesus ever using or condoning violence? Can you mention any time in the New Testament when violence was used without the user being told its not the proper way? That’s what the pacifists will say.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Tue Jun 13, 2017 8:47 am


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: Matthew Olsen is an idiot!

June 7, 2017 Photon Guy 0

The fact of the matter is that there are sick people in this world and they are going to find ways to harm innocent people whether they’ve got guns or not. And besides, if terrorists want to use guns they will use guns whether they’re legal or not. Just look at those terrorist shootings in France where guns are highly regulated. I see no reason why terrorists couldn’t use guns in either the bombing manchester or the massacre in London but in those cases they chose not to. Just because centerfire semiautomatic rifles are banned in England and much of the UK doesn’t mean terrorists won’t get ahold of them anyway and use them. As for them being banned, terrorists don’t care, they’re terrorists after all. Sometimes terrorists choose to use guns and sometimes they don’t but the legal availability of guns is not going to be a determining factor for terrorists on whether or not they choose to use them. After all, just look at the two deadliest terrorist attacks in the USA and perhaps the world, the Oklahoma bombing and 9/11, neither involved the use of guns and both killed far more many people than any mass shooting. And that brings me to my next point, guns aren’t what are used to kill the most people, bombs are. Bombings and arson usually kill more people than shootings. The Oklahoma bombing and 9/11 were both bombings not shootings and back in 1990 there was an arsonist in New York who set fire to a dance club and killed 87 people, more than in any shooting. So bombings usually kill more people than shootings, sometimes far many more people. And bombs are readily available, somebody who knows what they’re doing could build a bomb using materials that could be readily bought at a hardware store, grocery store, or gardening store with no background check or anything.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Tue Jun 06, 2017 10:43 pm


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: Matthew Olsen is an idiot!

June 7, 2017 Photon Guy 0

The fact of the matter is that there are sick people in this world and they are going to find ways to harm innocent people whether they’ve got guns or not. And besides, if terrorists want to use guns they will use guns whether they’re legal or not. Just look at those terrorist shootings in France where guns are highly regulated. I see no reason why terrorists couldn’t use guns in either the bombing manchester or the massacre in London but in those cases they chose not to. Just because centerfire semiautomatic rifles are banned in England and much of the UK doesn’t mean terrorists won’t get ahold of them anyway and use them. As for them being banned, terrorists don’t care, they’re terrorists after all. Sometimes terrorists choose to use guns and sometimes they don’t but the legal availability of guns is not going to be a determining factor for terrorists on whether or not they choose to use them. After all, just look at the two deadliest terrorist attacks in the USA and perhaps the world, the Oklahoma bombing and 9/11, neither involved the use of guns and both killed far more many people than any mass shooting. And that brings me to my next point, guns aren’t what are used to kill the most people, bombs are. Bombings and arson usually kill more people than shootings. The Oklahoma bombing and 9/11 were both bombings not shootings and back in 1990 there was an arsonist in New York who set fire to a dance club and killed 87 people, more than in any shooting. So bombings usually kill more people than shootings, sometimes far many more people. And bombs are readily available, somebody who knows what they’re doing could build a bomb using materials that could be readily bought at a hardware store, grocery store, or gardening store with no background check or anything.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Tue Jun 06, 2017 10:43 pm


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Matthew Olsen is an idiot!

June 5, 2017 Photon Guy 0

Matthew Glen Olsen, a prosecutor from North Dakota and the former director of the National Counterterrorism Center is a complete idiot! He was talking about the recent terrorist attack in London and said that if it had been in the USA it would’ve been much worse because of the availability of guns and particularly “assault weapons.” That’s so stupid! In this world we’ve got sick people and they’re going to find ways to harm innocents whether they’ve got guns or not! Furthermore if any of the victims or people in the area of the London terrorist attack had guns they could fight back and stop the terrorists from harming more people. Why we have such stupid people involved in running our country is beyond me.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Mon Jun 05, 2017 6:55 pm


No Picture

Guns • Re: Night Vision Distributors

June 5, 2017 Photon Guy 0

If you’re looking for some really good quality night vision gear you would want at least Generation III and for that you will need to break the bank. You will be looking at a $3000 to $4000 price tag for Gen III. An internet search can tell you where to get some good night vision. Aside from that I know stores such as Cabela’s and Bass Pro sell it.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Mon Jun 05, 2017 8:48 am


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: Another terror attack in the UK

June 5, 2017 Photon Guy 0
daaswampman wrote:
I would suggest they read their Bible and act accordingly. Swamp

They do. They take verses such as the one that says to turn the other cheek and the one that says to love your enemy and the one that says that he who takes the sword will perish by the sword and they apply those verses and they’re complete pacifists. They don’t like guns and they would not fight back if somebody attacked them or a friend or family member.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Sun Jun 04, 2017 8:34 pm


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: Another terror attack in the UK

June 4, 2017 Photon Guy 0
ajax727 wrote:
Islam cheers as England cries .
As fear grips them as they run and hide .
Please don’t stab or run over me
I will convert and pray to your beast .
My God said we should live in peace
That we should turn the other cheek .
As we watch people die in the street .
Islam cheers as England weeps .

When you mention turning the other cheek in line 6 I would like to point out that in the Bible when it talks about turning the other cheek it is in the context of when somebody slaps you, that’s precisely what the Bible says.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Sun Jun 04, 2017 8:53 am


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: Another terror attack in the UK

June 4, 2017 Photon Guy 0
ReadyMom wrote:
Per FOX news, there are now 9 dead. 6 Civilians, 3 attackers. At least 20 injured.

ReadyMom I feel for you. You said in another thread that you’re originally from the UK and that you’ve got friends and family there. This must be really hard for you with what’s happening over there right now. First the Manchester bombing and now this.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Sun Jun 04, 2017 8:46 am


No Picture

Videos, Movies, and TV shows • Snatched

June 2, 2017 Photon Guy 0

I just saw the movie Snatched and while it was a comedy and it was over the top, it did have some content that might appeal to a prepper or survivalist. A mom and daughter go to Ecuador and get kidnapped and go on all sorts of crazy adventures.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Fri Jun 02, 2017 10:01 am


No Picture

Videos, Movies, and TV shows • Snatched

June 2, 2017 Photon Guy 0

I just saw the movie Snatched and while it was a comedy and it was over the top, it did have some content that might appeal to a prepper or survivalist. A mom and daughter go to Ecuador and get kidnapped and go on all sorts of crazy adventures.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Fri Jun 02, 2017 10:01 am


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: Explosion in Baghdad

May 31, 2017 Photon Guy 0
DR1VENbyKNOWLEDGE wrote:
Even the amount it would impact you would depend on your proximity to the effects of the attack. 911 was shocking….Boston not as much but still had impact…San Bernardino, in my own backyard, not at all…

Six years before 9/11 in 1995 there was the Oklahoma City Bombing which although dwarfed by 9/11 still made a huge impact. 168 people were killed, some of them babies, and hundreds more were injured. It was talked about all throughout the country and it is still talked about from time to time to this very day. So I would say the magnitude of the impact is what influences it the most. 168 people were killed and while that’s much less than the thousands killed in 9/11 its still enough to make a big impact. That’s more people killed than in any mass shooting including the Orlando nightclub shooting, its more than the bombing in the Boston marathon or in Manchester or any of these more recent bombings in the middle east. The only terrorist attack I can think of that has more casualties is 9/11 so I would say magnitude is what affects impact the most.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Wed May 31, 2017 2:00 pm


No Picture

Terrorism & other Man made disasters • Re: Explosion in Baghdad

May 31, 2017 Photon Guy 0
DR1VENbyKNOWLEDGE wrote:
Even the amount it would impact you would depend on your proximity to the effects of the attack. 911 was shocking….Boston not as much but still had impact…San Bernardino, in my own backyard, not at all…

Six years before 9/11 in 1995 there was the Oklahoma City Bombing which although dwarfed by 9/11 still made a huge impact. 168 people were killed, some of them babies, and hundreds more were injured. It was talked about all throughout the country and it is still talked about from time to time to this very day. So I would say the magnitude of the impact is what influences it the most. 168 people were killed and while that’s much less than the thousands killed in 9/11 its still enough to make a big impact. That’s more people killed than in any mass shooting including the Orlando nightclub shooting, its more than the bombing in the Boston marathon or in Manchester or any of these more recent bombings in the middle east. The only terrorist attack I can think of that has more casualties is 9/11 so I would say magnitude is what affects impact the most.

Statistics: Posted by Photon Guy — Wed May 31, 2017 2:00 pm