[Grammar] "..., out being European hedonists"

[Bebop7]

Reading through a BBC article on the tragedy in Nice, France, I found this sentence puzzled to me.
"At the Bataclan and at the cafes the Islamists killed young adults, out being European hedonists."
What does 'out being European hedonists' mean in this context? My guess is that it(with a comma) adds an additional description to 'young adults'.

 

[emsr2d2]

"out" means that they were "out of their homes" or "out and about in town". "being European hedonists" indicates that they were targeted because they were having fun, listening to music, dancing, perhaps drinking alcohol, all of which are examples of unacceptable behaviour in the view of the terrorists.
Yes, it adds additional description to "young adults".

... the Islamists killed young adults [who were] out being European hedonists.

 

[Tdol]

It's a clumsy phrase IMO.

 

[Bebop7]

Thanks for the replies.
At least I recognize the meaning of what the authors wanted to talk about. One more question. I'm wondering if the 'being' used as the participle and has a function as a cause for the other clause. Is it correct to say that the sentence could be rephrased as:
"the Islamists killed young adults because they were out European hedonists."?

 

[emsr2d2]

No. It needs either "being" or something like "behaving like".

 

[Tdol]

Something like they were out enjoying themselves would work better for me.

 

[emsr2d2]

It would certainly be more natural but it doesn't convey the specific (alleged/perceived) feelings of the people who carried out the attacks.

 

[ChinaDan]

Thanks for the replies.
At least I recognize the meaning of what the authors wanted to talk about. One more question. I'm wondering if the 'being' used as the participle and has a function as a cause for the other clause. Is it correct to say that the sentence could be rephrased as:
"the Islamists killed young adults because they were out European hedonists."?

No. It needs either "being" or something like "behaving like".

Just to be clear, emsr is correcting your grammar, but your question regarding the cause/effect - the use of "because" in your sentence - is correct. It is hinted at, if not implied, in the original sentence that the reason for the attacks was the hedonistic behavior.

 

[Skrej]

Presumably 'hedonists' is being used sarcastically, since the source is the BBC. However, without further context it could be interpreted as even supporting or justifying the terrorists' actions, given the right author and the right source.

 

[Bebop7]

Just to be clear, emsr is correcting your grammar, but your question regarding the cause/effect - the use of "because" in your sentence - is correct. It is hinted at, if not implied, in the original sentence that the reason for the attacks was the hedonistic behavior.

Does 'being' have a kind of English usage of indicating the cause? Or did you comprehend the cause/effect, which is hinted in the sentence, by reading it in a whole context?
And trying to figure out usages of 'being', I found this example sentence: You can not expect them to sit still for that long, children being what they are.
Does 'being' have the same meaning of 'behaving like' as the one in the BBC article? I'm just curious about the usage of 'being'.

 

[Bebop7]

Does 'being' have a kind of English usage of indicating the cause? Or did you comprehend the cause/effect, which is hinted in the sentence, by reading it in a whole context?
And trying to figure out usages of 'being', I found this example sentence: You can not expect them to sit still for that long, children being what they are.
Does 'being' have the same meaning of 'behaving like' as the one in the BBC article? I'm just curious about the usage of 'being'.

I've got the answer of my first question by Skrej's reply. Please forget my first question about where the source of implying the cause comes from.

 

[Bebop7]

No. It needs either "being" or something like "behaving like".

Hmm, wait...
Why does it require "being"? Because maybe I'm not a native, I think it basically has the same meaning without using 'being'.
Can you explain the nuance of meaning between the two, including 'being' and not including, or why it is grammatically wrong?