The shooting at Sikh Temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, Sunday morning took at least seven lives and injured around 30. At this point, no one really knows what the motive was; however, several people who were there are speculating that it might have been a hate crime. 
Although authorities are being stingy with details, the people who were there are saying they believe it might have been a hate crime. Ven Boba Ri, a member of the temple's committee, told reporters that he had communicated with people who were inside at the time the shooting occurred. The consensus was that the shooter was a white male in his 30s, and he was not a member of the temple, raising suspicion that it was motivated by a deep-seated hatred.
No one is sure of the motive, however, because the shooter was killed by police officers at the scene.
According to witnesses, the gunman approached a Sikh priest who was standing outside the temple, shot him, and proceeded inside the temple, where he continued shooting. The first officer at the scene exchanged gunfire with the assailant, taking him down. Many of the worshipers had fled the area into different parts of the building after hearing shots being fired.
The question is, did the shooter mistake Sikhism for Islam? Did the shooter just decide to go off and kill some people who simply looked like they might be Muslim? Did the shooter even understand the difference between Sikhism and Islam? Did he even care?
The Sikh religion is relatively new in terms of organized faiths. It was established 500 years ago in the Punjab region of India, having broken away from Hinduism because believers did not agree with the Hindu caste system. Islam began at least 300 years earlier through the prophet Muhammad. They are two different sets of beliefs.
However, hatred does not split hairs when the eye sees only a brown person worshiping a faith much different than the mainstream. Hatred seeks to destroy everything it opposes, and the shooter, whoever he was, destroyed six innocent lives who had done nothing to him try to live their lives peacefully.
The Joint Terrorism Task Force, which is a collective effort of federal, state, and local law enforcement officials, was at the scene of the shooting by 1pm local time. Police officers were also dispatched to other Sikh temples around the area as a safety precaution.
With the Aurora shooting having happened just a couple of weeks ago, and now this shooting at Sikh Temple, lawmakers need to reevaluate laws that making purchasing guns and ammunition easy for domestic terrorists to acquire the weapons they use to kill.
©2012 Reno Berkeley for Gather News. Berkeley can be found on Tumblr, Google+, and Facebook.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 86
The conservative reaction to the Wisconsin Sikh massacre has been oddly obtuse. One person told me on gather she thought at first the crime must have been committed by a Muslim. Really? You said that?
There was a group of manual laborers (often = rednecks with pickups, in my personal experience) behind me, not waiting patiently.
I heard the term "sand ni**er" from one of them behind me. I turned around and looked but couldn't see who had said it. So I turned my head back to the front and may have quietly said "redneck bigot". I can't seem to recall for certain.
India is not usually associated with sand - gulf state muslims are. Except in the minds of total f'idiots - they can't even keep their bigotries categorized correctly.
The only time I think finger pointing would possibly be appropriate is if he gave a clear indication of what he was up to, such as in the case of the Fort Hood shooter, who contacted a known terrorist on several occasions and even spoke of killing civilians before he freaked out and killed 13 soldiers - that should have been prevented, as the FBI knew full well what the shooter was up to.
My take is whether it was a tea-partier or an Occupier, whether it was a Rush Limbaugh or a Jon Stewart fan, it was the act of one crazy guy, just like the Colorado Theater Shooter or the Gabby Giffords Shooter or the crazy face muncher. Whether this sick individual listened to talk radio or had a crush on Rachel Maddow is completely irrelevant - assuming he acted alone. If he acted alone, he is just one twisted individual. We will never understand the acts of lunatics such as this, who most likely had a recent huge trauma in his life or just went off the deep end. If the other recent shootings give any indication of what is to come...this man has been seeing (or has seen) a psychologist and his family and close friends saw that something was not quite right.
Additionally, there is no such thing as a "hate crime." Only a fool would need to invent such a phrase in order that they may understand and delineate that killing People is Evil.
Damned fools. I've had it. I've had it with them all...
Maybe in your little world, but there is, it's against the law, get over it~good thing you're not a lawmaker!
And so it goes that You see...it is a question that need never to be asked...
We have so perverted "justice"...
Only a fool would need to invent such a phrase in order that they may understand and delineate that killing People is Evil.
Be still, and tell me when Murdering any innocent person is more Evil, or less Evil, than Murdering any other innocent Person.
Only a fool would invent such a phrase in order that they may understand and delineate that killing People is Evil.
OH???
"I think that if somebody kills someone else, it is a hate crime, right?" -
Wrong.
You are a very clear thinker on most Issues, Renee. This is not one of them ;)
To place more Value upon one Victim than another because of Colour is an insidious racism of its own, is it not???????? To agree that there is such thing as a "hate crime," or a "protected class" is racism, purely and simply on its face. Such a Lie is so unlike you.
(*sigh*) ...Tell me when Murdering any innocent person is more Evil, or less Evil, than Murdering any other innocent Person. Please, just that.
The thing that made me wrestle at all is that I am all about the underdog - if I see someone getting picked on, I want to help. But that being said, that does not apply here. So, Mr. Mark-John, I agree with you. All victims should be treated equally, as should all criminals. Justice should be blind - and fair.
I do understand that you've a massive and compassionate Heart, Renee. Sometimes, even that very Beautiful thing may cloud our Judgement.
I do understand. :)
BFD. And, Duh. Seriously.
Added to my list of notable quotes.
Gratsola Nehi (Knee-High)
The American people WILL wake up to the Truth that, as a Nation of 300+ Million, we're not doing badly; that the Law-abiding should be Carrying Guns; and that there are Sociopaths in every Group, and they should be roundly condemned.
And...silly Girls in every Group, as well ;)
Laughs! I save my rebuttals for the lucid; but I'm a generous Man...you may have all of my spare empty rejoinders, Love. :)
When you're open to some Wisdom, get back to me.
Come again? Please clarify.
Once upon a time, I issued a very wrong post on the times square bomber, arguing that he might be a right wing domestic terrorist. I had to apologize for that one, when it turned out he was a jihadist wannabee. So I realize that people make mistakes. but to argue that there is no such thing as a hate crime?
I don't blame the right wing, I am more selective than that. Even GWB gave speeches defending Muslim Americans. But Michele Bachmann, I can't stomach her philosophy that Christians are good and Muslims are evil. That kind of thinking can give rise to this sort of act.
The criticism of Michell Bachmann's investigation is being lead by the same political correction.
You progressives are totally out of your mind...you criticize and call for the boycott of a fast food chain over the gay marriage issue then you support a society (Muslim) that advocates the killing of homosexuals.
You criticize the faithful for not wanting to provide abortion and sterilization services calling it a war on women then you support a society (once again Muslim) who advocated the "honor" killing of young women because they become too westernized!
You are freaking IDIOTS
Gunman in Wisconsin was deeply involved in white-supremacist music scene
I have to agree with Dan on this one~there were plenty of red flags. Going back to all the media coverage, I clearly recall SMDH in disbelief!
No you can't do that Kooky. It is not factually possible! you have to twist and manipulate the facts to get to there from where we are.
Read the teachings of Jesus then read the teachings of Mohammad;
What they (Westboro Baptist Church, Reverend Charles Worley, Sergeant Matthew Neu, Wiley Drake, the White Christian Revival Center (which now fills unto bursting since Obama became President), Christian Identity Ministries, and the historically-mass-murderous once-again burgeoning Ku Klux Klan) do is not supported by the teachings of Jesus what the radical Islamist s do is supported by the teachings of Mohammad.
As the terrorist shooter called out "Allah Akbar".
Yes. The gunman was deeply involved in the white supremacist scene.
The pattern is pretty clear. Anti-Muslim, anti-minority, anti-gay, anti-nonChristian, anti-women, anti-everything that isn't "just like" they are, i.e., the white supremacists, evangelicals, birthers, bigots, tea party.
Umm...I certainly can't speak for liberals, not being one myself. Nonetheless, it's pretty clear that advocating a boycott of Chick-Fil-A is a bit different from the ludicrous anti-Muslim rhetoric I've heard here and elsewhere. Not every professed Christian believes that homosexuals are pariahs. Not every professed Muslim does either. BTW, you might find some of the descriptions of young men in the Arabian Nights interesting in that regard.
How do you go from what I posted to "ludicrous anti-Muslim rhetoric"?
Kind of a stretch isn't it?
Sure does sweety, by definition a Christians is some one who follows the teachings of Christ......That would be Jesus, hon.....To which you, most Christians including your grandmother probably didn't understand what Jesus was teaching.
John 14:6
"Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
Not a trick....Instruction from Jesus Christ himself.
"(yes, I'm trying to get you to admit your ignorance of biblical teachings)"
As you exhibit your ignorance for all to see.
BTW,
What am I backing off of?
Let me explain it this way...You will know that I'm "backing off" when I tell you that you are right.
Right now all you are doing is flailing about because you can't counter what I post...Trying to act like you have the upper hand, in poker it's called bluffing in real life it's called posing.
Timothy McVeigh and this new murderer, along with many others, were tea party bigots before there was a tea party.
The sheer bigotry of the tea party is astounding. It's no surprise that the fake-tea party renamed itself to hide their bigotry. But there is no place for bigotry in America.
It's time for honest Republicans, Independents, and Democrats to call out the people who espouse such hatred. This is not America.
And your point?
He (McVeigh) was as much a terrorist as the terrorists who flew the airliners into the twin towers!
And no one can attach him to Patriotic Americans no matter how hard they try!
The attempt in itself is a reflection of the character of the poster.
Took 'em two tries, but they got it burned down. Sorry Renee... sorry Mark-John, when it's about someone's religion, color, sexual orientation, it's a hate crime.
And no, M-J, I'm no fool (but I'm pretty sure you are, or deliberately obtuse or ignorant -- or both). As defined in law, the term "hate crime" is actually pretty easily understood as being different from other identical crimes committed for different reasons, even those of personal "hate." I have trouble understanding why anyone would deliberately invite people to consider him stupid by being so disingenuous as to claim not to comprehend the difference.
You have inspired me to craft a few quotes this morning. Thank you.
"Standard criminal charges address specific crimes. Hate crime charges discourage societal bigotry that history shows sometimes explode into mass persecution, or even genocide."
Which of course begs,
Are we punishing an individual for society's bigotry? If so, is that fair? Shouldn't society be punished for that instead?
A different topic you raise. I largely derived this from philosophers before me:
"The merely ignorant lose some debates - or parts of many debates. The stupid do not."