Jump to content

Mass Shooting


Paul G.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

It's a shame that the ideological split in the US prevents any level-headed discussion of any ways to deal with this type of occurrence.

Put that entirely on the left. They're clearly the ones who deplatform folks and have hysterical reactions if someone might deign to discuss an issue with someone from the right leaning camp.

 

Don't think it's all in their lap? Look at the characterization by the left of Dave Rubin who can go and have talks to lots of conservatives about issues and have calm conversations but Democrats refuse to speak to him (With rare exceptions like Andrew Wang).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Antifa false flag? The manifesto reads very left, apart from some not fitting elements that seem to be placed to make it a right wing crime.

 

It's not hard to be crazy and irrational and pick from all over the political spectrum what you think is true and where you should go. Again, that's why they're crazy. You could easily see such a nutter quoting Voltare, the most ardent of Monarchal views, Thomas Jefferson's ideals of liberty and Maxist concepts all together as coherent.

 

Remember, they're utterly unhinged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

And rather then, maybe, politicians would get off their ass when the public uproar made them do something.

"Do something", anything, or is there something in particular? Make the inhuman part of humanity go away? We could be struggling with a knife crime epidemic, or an acid crime epidemic. If violence has become the answer, we could outlaw pointed sticks and fists and still not solve the problem.

 

There's no one answer and many options aren't even getting a moment of thought. We're a society that glorifies solving differences through violence. We have a growing generation of people who crave the "blaze of glory" ending because they have no purpose in life nor any ability to stand against the vicissitudes of life. We have dismantled the mental health system with absolutely nothing to replace it, which also impacts the homeless problem. If we banned the sale of all firearms tomorrow, we'd have to launch a massive house by house search for the rest, which would be fruitless and cause an explosion in this country.

 

 

Thus far, you could be speaking for the UK as well.

 

I dont think you need to ban firearms. I think you perhaps need to be a hell of a lot more selective about who gets them. Do you have any system where to purchase a firearm, you have to be recommended by someone else?

 

 

The closest I can think of is in my state, each town/city grants(or not) a local hand gun license which can, depending on the municipality, require recommendations from other individuals. After you get your local license, you send that and a bunch of money to the state police and they grant you a state pistol permit renewable every five years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Inevitably, what happens is that whichever ideology shouts loudest drowns any sensible discussion with whatever they think is the most important root cause

 

The hammer of precise writing smashing down a nail of truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting point by Rick Wilson

 

If we found an Islamic terrorist hub called, let's just say...JihadChan, where Muslim terrorists were indoctrinated and recruited, where they posted their manifestos, and were cheered on and supported, we'd flood the zone with everything from LE to cyber to JDAMS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah yes. Let's bomb the internet. It's a rational response to the problem.

 

In other news, although it pains me to note this, I believe that my point is proven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Antifa false flag? The manifesto reads very left, apart from some not fitting elements that seem to be placed to make it a right wing crime.

It's not hard to be crazy and irrational and pick from all over the political spectrum what you think is true and where you should go. Again, that's why they're crazy. You could easily see such a nutter quoting Voltare, the most ardent of Monarchal views, Thomas Jefferson's ideals of liberty and Maxist concepts all together as coherent.

 

Remember, they're utterly unhinged.

Well said, Ryan. I think another thing people tend to forget with the immediacy of news and social media, is that we are talking about a country of c. 300 million people. Lots of folk die of all sorts of bad stuff every day, but an event like this grabs and holds attention. As DB pointed out it's necessary not to legislate in thd immediate aftermath of a tragedy, but to keep calm and apply rational thought to potential solutions. I think Jeff's post above was insightful too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Antifa false flag? The manifesto reads very left, apart from some not fitting elements that seem to be placed to make it a right wing crime.

It's not hard to be crazy and irrational and pick from all over the political spectrum what you think is true and where you should go. Again, that's why they're crazy. You could easily see such a nutter quoting Voltare, the most ardent of Monarchal views, Thomas Jefferson's ideals of liberty and Maxist concepts all together as coherent.

 

Remember, they're utterly unhinged.

Well said, Ryan. I think another thing people tend to forget with the immediacy of news and social media, is that we are talking about a country of c. 300 million people. Lots of folk die of all sorts of bad stuff every day, but an event like this grabs and holds attention. As DB pointed out it's necessary not to legislate in thd immediate aftermath of a tragedy, but to keep calm and apply rational thought to potential solutions. I think Jeff's post above was insightful too.

 

Plus, the media make them famous. This generation lives by the number of "clicks" they get. If the media were forced to not acknowledge them at all, and their name was never published it might help. Plus you are right Antifa was headed that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's actually interesting to see how hard people are struggling to squeeze this guy into an ideological / party lines box they can use against the other side, reminds me of the sex vs gender fluidity argument some try really hard to explain to validate their point of view, rather than have to... you know, take a good hard look at their point of view and whether or not THAT makes sense.

As far as 4chan goes, it can be described as... well, Twitter -- only you don't have to create a login and username, and they don't censor their content as severely. That's it. It's what backpage was to craigslist. It's not a spooky "dark web" website for terrorists, but it is chalk full of the kind of people you'll get anywhere you combine anonymity with freedom of speech, and make no mistake -- if you get rid of that pesky anonymity and freedom of speech, those nutjobs (with their own little bell curve ranging from warped but harmless, to extremists crazies who will hurt you, possibly eat you, then go to sleep with the fan on medium and a smile on their face) are still out there. Yes folks, an uncomfortable number of people all around you are Stanford prison experiment cruel just below the surface, convinced that all they need is a little authoritarianism (I'm sorry, benevolent dictatorship) and some Robespierre grit they could roll up their sleeves and fix the world (but please don't give that kind of power to someone with different opinions!). Even without 4chan, you can see hints of this all over the place on the internet, even where there is less anonymity (but still a screen between them and who they're talking to) -- look up the most positive Facebook, twitter, or youtube post you can think of, then scroll through the comments and someone on the internet will find a way to make rude comments or rain on that parade. Fortunately most people will never go on to do anything crazy like that (even on 4chan), just like most people with some level of mental illness will never go on to hurt themselves or others.

Here's the thing though, Mainstream media (and now social media to a degree) has classically been the average person's window to the outside world and they want the ability to decide what to censor and not to censor, what to show you and what not to show you, and HOW to present it to you. Just look at how much influence they have on the debate formats, and indeed how much influence they have on getting someone elected or not simply by the amount of coverage they give or don't give a candidate. Nobody is going to say "well, you just need a little less freedom of speech and anonymity and this sort of thing won't happen so we'll use our influence to try to squash any platforms like that", instead they'll say "I mean, terrorists use it amiright? Needs to come down" and if you don't agree because it's a complex issue and setting that sort of precedent has all kinds of 2nd order effects and implications, then, well, you need to be closely monitored.

It boils down to this -- the two extremes of the spectrum, the two straw men: Complete anonymity and privacy and freedom of speech on one end, or "Insert your ID card into the CAC card reader to access the internet, everything you say or do on this system is monitored comrade" on the other. The answer is somewhere in the middle sure, but which side would you rather err towards, understanding that there are tradeoffs and repercussions either way?

This isn't presented to the population like that, because in the end those who shape policy aren't interested in your opinion on the subject. Instead it's presented / worded in ways carefully designed to build perceived public support for whatever vision those with influence has, and the average person really doesn't want to have to think that hard about something or we'd all be philosophers. The average person is intellectually lazy (perhaps not on purpose) and want this complex world full of shades of grey simplified as much as possible, fed to them, and want to feel like they have some sort of say in the matter.

Edited by Burncycle360
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul what is his point? Those sort will just migrate somewhere else if you shut down 8chan and I'd rather not see wholesale censorship of the internet based on the whims of the ruling class and silicon valley technocrats.

 

They need to stop highlighting the scum that do these attacks, stop trying to analyze their crackpot manifestos, and stop essentially giving them the fame they want. Wipe their name from existence, hang them high with some sturdy rope, and bury them in a shallow ditch in the desert.

Edited by JW Collins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A soldier who did the right thing and saved a dozen children in El Paso (Armed citizen soldier with his Glock): https://taskandpurpose.com/el-paso-shooting-glendon-oakley

 

Not to diminish the positive spin, but the mall is posted so technically he was carrying illegally despite having a permit.

 

Tennessee has a Safe Harbor statute that basically says if you have a carry permit and are carrying where you weren't supposed to (past a no guns sign), and were justified in using your firearm in an incident, then you won't be charged with carrying where you weren't supposed to. However, if you get caught carrying under any other circumstances in these places (ie, reaching up to the top shelf for something at the store) despite your permit, they'll nail you for it with a Class B misdemeanor.

 

Other places like New York has no such protections (hence the 60+ year old resident who fought off some home invaders got crucified because he used a revolver registered in his Dad's name and neglected to re-register it in his name after his dad died).

 

Not sure if Texas has those sorts of protections, but I hope the state doesn't try and nail him for it even though the left would be foaming at the mouth to under any other circumstances.

 

 

It's ironic because rational people understand that criminals don't comply with gun free zones, and so there's an unspoken rule among some with a carry permit that "concealed is concealed" and "it's better to be judged by 12 (if you're caught carrying where you weren't supposed to be) than carried by 6" (pallbearers, because you complied with the law as a good responsible law abiding citizen and got shot and killed by a criminal who didn't). It's a hell of a choice society puts people in a position to have to make, and they don't really have any sense of humor if you say it's a matter of civil disobedience.

Edited by Burncycle360
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A soldier who did the right thing and saved a dozen children in El Paso (Armed citizen soldier with his Glock): https://taskandpurpose.com/el-paso-shooting-glendon-oakley

Not to diminish the positive spin, but the mall is posted so technically he was carrying illegally despite having a permit.

 

Tennessee has a Safe Harbor statute that basically says if you have a carry permit and are carrying where you weren't supposed to (past a no guns sign), and were justified in using your firearm in an incident, then you won't be charged with carrying where you weren't supposed to. However, if you get caught carrying under any other circumstances in these places (ie, reaching up to the top shelf for something at the store) despite your permit, they'll nail you for it with a Class B misdemeanor.

 

Other places like New York has no such protections (hence the 60+ year old resident who fought off some home invaders got crucified because he used a revolver registered in his Dad's name and neglected to re-register it in his name after his dad died).

 

Not sure if Texas has those sorts of protections, but I hope the state doesn't try and nail him for it even though the left would be foaming at the mouth to under any other circumstances.

 

 

It's ironic because rational people understand that criminals don't comply with gun free zones, and so there's an unspoken rule among some with a carry permit that "concealed is concealed" and "it's better to be judged by 12 (if you're caught carrying where you weren't supposed to be) than carried by 6" (pallbearers, because you complied with the law as a good responsible law abiding citizen and got shot and killed by a criminal who didn't). It's a hell of a choice society puts people in a position to have to make, and they don't really have any sense of humor if you say it's a matter of civil disobedience.

 

I suspect an overzealous Obama worshiping commander looking to score points for his next fitness report will try and hang him out to dry. As for the Texas Cops, I suspect they saw nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A soldier who did the right thing and saved a dozen children in El Paso (Armed citizen soldier with his Glock): https://taskandpurpose.com/el-paso-shooting-glendon-oakley

 

"Oakley was born into an Army family. His father, Glendon Oakley Sr., served for 31 years before retiring in 2011 at the rank of sergeant major; his mother, Wendolyn D. Oakley, retired as a master sergeant in 2001 after two decades; and his older sister, Glenda Oakley, is a retired captain."

 

Now, that's a family of service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Antifa false flag? The manifesto reads very left, apart from some not fitting elements that seem to be placed to make it a right wing crime.

It's not hard to be crazy and irrational and pick from all over the political spectrum what you think is true and where you should go. Again, that's why they're crazy. You could easily see such a nutter quoting Voltare, the most ardent of Monarchal views, Thomas Jefferson's ideals of liberty and Maxist concepts all together as coherent.

 

Remember, they're utterly unhinged.

 

This. At first glance, some of the stuff in his "manifesto" reads more like Charles Manson than anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a shame that the ideological split in the US prevents any level-headed discussion of any ways to deal with this type of occurrence.

 

It's a shame that the ideological split in the US prevents and level-headed discussion about anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Inevitably, what happens is that whichever ideology shouts loudest drowns any sensible discussion with whatever they think is the most important root cause, without any consideration of practicality.

 

For myself, I tend to retreat into statistics, because I understand those more than I understand humans. When doing that, one looks at the comparative risk - the contribution to the societal risk made by this type of occurrence compared to every other cause of death. When one does that, one inevitably gets accused of being heartless, because one is apparently not caring of the individuals who have been affected.

 

The first point is sadly true.

 

Regarding the second, as callous as it sounds, even with these recent incidents the last few days statistically it's still one of the safest times to be alive. If you live in the suburbs of the US that's even more true. Most Americans are still more likely to suffer harm from a drunk or texting driver (the latter, in some places in the US, still isn't outlawed :blink:) than from any sort of masscal incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...