Active shooter San Bernardino, CA

[ChumpDumper]

Then why hasn't the FBI classified it as an act of terrorism AND workplace violence?

Have they denied it fits the classification of workplace violence?

I'd like to see a link to that.

Are you really this stupid?

Nope. I said it meets the definition of both. How does it not?

Explain your reasoning.

[vy65]

Have they denied it fits the classification of workplace violence?

I'd like to see a link to that.

Nope. I said it meets the definition of both. How does it not?

Explain your reasoning.

They also haven't denied it as an act of sexual violence, or racial violence, or an act of phobia either.

You're claiming its workplace violence. It's your burden of proof, not mine.

You've seen what the NYT report how the FBI is treating this. Do you have any evidence from the FBI, OSHA, a lawyer, or anyone else that supports your take?

[vy65]

Again, since they're not mutually exclusive, why hasn't the FBI come out and said its treating this as workplace violence and terrorism?

[ChumpDumper]

They also haven't denied it as an act of sexual violence, or racial violence, or an act of phobia either.

It doesn't fit any of those definitions. It does fit the FBI's definition of workplace violence.

Also terrorism.

You're claiming its workplace violence. It's your burden of proof, not mine.

Already proved.

You've seen what the NYT report how the FBI is treating this. Do you have any evidence from the FBI, OSHA, a lawyer, or anyone else that supports your take?

I know how the FBI is treating this.

How does that change the definition of workplace violence?

Explain your reasoning.

[ChumpDumper]

Again, since they're not mutually exclusive, why hasn't the FBI come out and said its treating this as workplace violence and terrorism?

How are they not treating this as workplace violence and terrorism?

If they are not mutually exclusive, the methods for working the case aren't mutually exclusive either.

[DarrinS]

Very obedient wife to go along with his workplace revenge plot (right after announcing her loyalty to ISIS).

[vy65]

It doesn't fit any of those definitions. It does fit the FBI's definition of workplace violence.

Also terrorism.

Already proved.

I know how the FBI is treating this.

How does that change the definition of workplace violence?

Explain your reasoning.

Still haven't answered the question. Try again.

If it fits the FBI definition of workplace violence, why didn't the FBI announce it was treating it as such when it announced it was treating it as terrorism?

[ChumpDumper]

Very obedient wife to go along with his workplace revenge plot (right after announcing her loyalty to ISIS).

Who said this wasn't an act of terrorism, Darrin?

[vy65]

How are they not treating this as workplace violence and terrorism?

If they are not mutually exclusive, the methods for working the case aren't mutually exclusive either.

Because they didn't announce they were treating it as workplace violence.

If they were following your interpretation, why didn't they announce that today when they called it terrorism? Seems like a golden opportunity.

[vy65]

Apparently, when the FBI investigates workplace violence, it calls it terrorism.

Good thing these are the folks screening those Syrian refugees, amirite?

[ChumpDumper]

Still haven't answered the question. Try again.

If it fits the FBI definition of workplace violence, why didn't the FBI announce it was treating it as such when it announced it was treating it as terrorism?

Why would they need to announce it that way?

For you to win an internet argument?

I will ask you the question TSA ran away from.

While agreeing on that broader definition of the
problem, specialists have also come to a consensus that workplace violence falls into
four broad categories. They are:

TYPE 1: Violent acts by criminals who have no other connection with the workplace,
but enter to commit robbery or another crime.

TYPE 2: Violence directed at employees by customers, clients, patients, students,
inmates, or any others for whom an organization provides services.

TYPE 3: Violence against coworkers, supervisors, or managers by a present or former
employee.

TYPE 4: Violence committed in the workplace by someone who doesn’t work there, but
has a personal relationship with an employee—an abusive spouse or domestic partner.

https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/p..._download/file

Now vy65, does this incident meet the FBI's definition of workplace violence shown as Type 3?

Yes or no.

[DarrinS]

Who said this wasn't an act of terrorism, Darrin?

It was an act of terrorism that happened at his workplace.

[ChumpDumper]

Apparently, when the FBI investigates workplace violence, it calls it terrorism.

If you have a problem with the FBI's definitions, take it up with them. I'm sure they would love to hear from you.

Good thing these are the folks screening those Syrian refugees, amirite?

Are you afraid of those Syrian refugees?

[ChumpDumper]

It was an act of terrorism that happened at his workplace.

You didn't answer the question, Darrin.

Who said this wasn't an act of terrorism, Darrin?

[DarrinS]

You're trying too hard, chumpy.

[ChumpDumper]

You're trying too hard, chumpy.

You didn't answer the question, Darrin.

Who said this wasn't an act of terrorism, Darrin?

[DarrinS]

You didn't answer the question, Darrin.

Who said this wasn't an act of terrorism, Darrin?

It's OBVIOUSLY an act of terrorism. Why are you arguing so hard for the workplace violence angle?

[ChumpDumper]

It's OBVIOUSLY an act of terrorism. Why are you arguing so hard for the workplace violence angle?

You didn't answer the question, Darrin.

Who said this wasn't an act of terrorism, Darrin?

[vy65]

Why would they need to announce it that way?

For you to win an internet argument?

I will ask you the question TSA ran away from.



https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/p..._download/file

Now vy65, does this incident meet the FBI's definition of workplace violence shown as Type 3?

Yes or no.

We've seen your quote plenty of times.

Again, answer the question: why didn't the FBI announce it was treating it as workplace violence today when they announced it was treating the shooting as terrorism?

[vy65]

It's really a simple question, why are you running away from this?

The FBI announced how it was classifyng the shooting today. It's treating it as terrorism. Why didn't they mention workplace violence since its in their own definition, right?

[ChumpDumper]

We've seen your quote plenty of times.

And you won't answer it.

Again, answer the question: why didn't the FBI announce it was treating it as workplace violence today when they announced it was treating the shooting as terrorism?

There is no need to announce it like that.

Now answer my question.

[ChumpDumper]

It's really a simple question, why are you running away from this?

The FBI announced how it was classifyng the shooting today. It's treating it as terrorism. Why didn't they mention workplace violence since its in their own definition, right?

There is no need to announce it like that.

Now answer my question.

[vy65]

And you won't answer it.

There is no need to announce it like that.

Now answer my question.

If it's a textbook example of workplace violence, why didn't the FBI say so today?

Why can't you answer that question?

[ChumpDumper]

It's OBVIOUSLY an act of terrorism. Why are you arguing so hard for the workplace violence angle?

You didn't answer the question, Darrin.

Who said this wasn't an act of terrorism, Darrin?

[vy65]

There is no need to announce it like that.

Now answer my question.

What does that mean?